Miles joins the ranks of such copy-cat authors as Mark Hertsgaard with his "Diary". This book is far from being "an astonishingly detailed chronology of gigs, venues, quotes, and memorable facts about the world's most famous band". Miles has simply taken the contents of Mark Lewisohn's extensively researched "Chronicle" and added pictures.

Aside from being a great-looking "coffee table" book, it is hardly worth the price. The book contains no great revelations, nor does it have any details that have not been covered ad nauseum in the any of the hundreds of books already written about the Beatles.

If you can live without the big pictures, I strongly suggest locating a copy of any of Lewisohn's books.

- Paul, NYC

I found this book to be a great source of quotes concerning the Beatles, although much of the information was a little old but that's got to be there since it's a chronological account, and of course much would seem same old same old because i have read so incredibly much on some of my favorite people...i would definitely recommend this book for an aspiring fan or the die-hard like myself. Enjoy!

This book covers most everything that happened to the Beatles and even has quotes. The book has many pictures of the Fab Four that I had never seen before. I enjoyed the way the book was set up. No matter if you are a hardcore Beatles Freak or a first time listener you can still enjoy the book.

I thought this book was a very readable overview of Jack Kerouac's life. It helped me gain some kind of overview which I had found elusive reading Gerald Nicosia's more detailed book. However what marred the book for me was Miles's intrusive and over-bearing judgements. Surely it's better to present the facts and let them speak for themselves? In chapter 8 (just over half way through the book) he launches into a tirade ....'How can a man deny his own child?... Where was Kerouac when he should have been reading his daughter bedtime stories, sharing with her his love for words?...' and so on. Unfortunately once he's in this mode he doesn't let up. I appreciate the sentiment and it's difficult not to judge Kerouac harshly over this - but I felt Miles should have made more of an effort to understand his subject. I almost felt I leant more about Barry Miles than Kerouac in this section of the book and it's commendable that Miles feels so strongly about family loyalties but is that really the issue here?

Miles does an incredible job of putting together the jaded intricate life of an insanely selfish man. Kerouac was an incredible writer, yes, because he scrounged off everyone around him to better his skill. Funny when our heros turn into humans and we begin to feel our own inspiration from it.

This biography is part of an unceasing flow of writings about Kerouac and about the Beat movement which he helped to inspire. Miles's book is valuable because it explains why people continue to read Kerouac and the beats and also focuses on the limitations of the movement, I think, through discussion of Kerouac as a person.

Kerouac was first and foremost a writer. Miles' book emphasizes this. It discusses virtually each of Kerouac's major works, and minor works as well, in the context of his life -- when, precisely, they were written, what they are about, and where each book fits, in Miles's usually well-considered opinion, in Kedrouac's work as a whole. Such writing is more the purview of literary criticism than biography but Miles does it well and it is needed in a consideration of Kerouac's life and work. He focuses on the spritual side of the beats, their quarrel with conformity, materialism, and repressed sexuality, and their emphasis on feeling and the expression of feeling. Miles properly places Kerouac in the romantic tradition of literature and within American Romanticism in particular as a follower, most immediately, of Thomas Wolfe.

Miles does not spare Kerouac the man, in a discussion that should discourage any tendendy to hero-worship or mystification. Kerouac was selfish and inconsiderate of others, adolescent at the core, unduly attached to his mother, on the far fringes of the American right (although he probably deserves to be praised for not adopting the hippie, ultra-left, anti United States attitude of his followers and colleagues), and lead a destructive life, to his own talents and to the lives of people who loved him and had a right to depend upon him, such as his daughter.

As a writer, Kerouac emerges in the book as a person of talent with a vision of American life that is valuable (though hardly unique, I think). He wrote well but too much and too carelessly and too much under the influence of drugs. He also, as Miles suggests was overly dogmatic and rigid in his use of spontaneous prose.

The beats were a unique literary movement and Kerouac was an integral part of it. His books, I think will continue to be read and valued not for the most part as literary masterpieces, but as expressing the mood of a generation. There is much in them that is worthwhile. Miles' portrait of Kerouac and his work is judicious. It also encourages the reader to explore Kerouac's writings for his or herself, which is the goal of any good biography or a writer.

John Lennon's untimely death was one of the great tragedies of Paul McCartney's life.

Not only did he lose a former best friend and half of the best songwriting team of all time, but the resultant rush to eulogise Lennon was often done at the expense of McCartney, whose own contribution was often trivialised.

This is McCartney's version of the history of the Beatles and their music. It is hard to imagine McCartney being insecure about anything, but he certainly seems territorial, protective and sensitive of his own legacy.

Perhaps the greatest injustice to McCartney was being inducted to Rock and Roll Hall of fame seven years after Lennon, in spite of being an equal contributor to the Beatles, and having a far more commercially successful solo career.

As far as the Lennon McCartney compositions go, there are a few surprises, for instance, he says he wrote the music to 'In My Life' a song which is obviously very Lennon but this actually makes sense. On many of the other Lennon songs he wrote the middle eight or the words of the last verse and vice versa. At times this seems petty, but to be fair he does give Lennon credit on some songs that are obviously strongly McCartney compositions such as the middle sections of Michelle and She's Leaving Home, and a 50/50 credit on I saw her standing there. On Eleanor Rigby he credits Lennon some of the lyrics to the final verse, although in the Anthology documentary he says the song is 100% his. The key to crediting any Lennon McCartney song is he who sung it wrote it or most of it.

The most interesting portions of this book are the direct quotations by McCartney about his life, his relationship with John and the other Beatles and his relationship with Linda, and his insights into John and the meaning of many of his songs which are the best I've read. He is surprisingly candid and open, compared to tv interviews where he has rarely allowed interviewers to get behind the McCartney persona.

Some of his comments about John are quite touching. The history of how he met Linda, and how their relationship developed is a compelling love story.

For instance we get to hear about the death of Paul's mother when he was 14, the tragic death of John's mother the business relationship with Brian Epstein, the Apple fiasco,the wrangling, the naivety of the Beatles in business matters, the loss of ownership of their songs and so forth.

As for Mr Miles himself, he is not the world's greatest writer, which is why I only give it 3 stars. The chapter on avantgarde London is the most boring thing I have ever read. He could easily have edited 100 pages out of this book without compromising the content.

In addition, he is obviously biased towards McCartney and disses Lennon by act and omission. He zeroes in on McCartney as a painter making him out to be a better artist than Lennon, and making the most pretensious comparisons between McCartney's art and classic painters.

He doesn't seem to understand that by undermining Lennon he is also undermining McCartney's credibility. Fortunately, McCartney's own comments are far more respectful, and seemingly objective.

In Mr Miles favour, I must say there are very few questions about McCartney that are left unanswered, and in spite of all its obvious flaws this is still the best psychological insight into Paul McCartney and John Lennon that I have read, so I would recommend this book. I would strongly recommend the books by Hunter Davies and Philip Norman.

This book is great for all Beatles and Paul McCartney fans. Paul's quotes and words about what the songs are really about are terrific. The story rarely gets boring as it tells almost everything about Paul's life, from losing his mother and meeting John, to playing in Hamburg, to the fame of the Beatles and finally to the present time and all that fits in between. One trouble I found with the book is how ready Barry Miles is to put down John as a doped up, lazy junkie...very far from the truth. He also finds ways to put Paul on an altar and condemn nearly EVERYTHING John has done. This is not true at all of Paul's words which are quoted as he rarely has anything bad to say about John, which is reassuring. Finally, another fault I found with the book is how Paul seems to be a glutton for credit of nearly every great Lennon-McCartney song...he gives himself much of the credit of the great songs of John's and claims he could almost never write a "middle-eight". Most disturbing of these claims is his taking 40% of the writing credit for "Norwegian Wood", says he wrote the entire musical part of "In My Life", and he takes a lot of credit for "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds". However, he is not as ready to share the credit with many of his songs. But all in all I would recommend this book for Beatle fans as it gives an inside view of how things began and tells a story behind most of the songs made and then gives good details surrounding the break-up and justifies his actions when suing the other Beatles.

This is the best book I have ever read about Paul McCartney, and for that matter about the Beatles.

I really enjoyed reading it because it explains very detailed many aspects of Paul McCartney's life, such as when he met people, how some things and some people in Paul's life influenced him, how songs started, how an album cover was designed from the beginning, why a song was done the way it was made and many other interesting details about his career, leaving out the stupid gossip about his sex life, and things like that, that only the Enquirer would be interested on.

Another interesting aspect of this book is that it explains the Allen Klein fiasco clearly, much better than all the other Beatles books that I have read.

The only way this book would have been even better is if the author would have continued with Paul's solo career, album by album, year by year up to today, in the same format, but maybe Mr. Miles and Sir Paul McCartney are already working on that book!

This is a book that should be in any Beatles fan's home. I would also recommend this book to anybody that wants to understand what went on in the 60's.

Good work Mr. Barry Miles!! Please write Part II!

While this book has many great pictures from the decade and examples of artwork inspired by psychedelic rock, it is a very lightweight effort. Perhaps it was meant to be that way. Concentrating almost solely on London and the Haight-Ashbury district of San Francisco, the book consists mainly of reminiscences of aging hippies, most of whom were involved in the music and/or art scene of that era, either in San Francisco or London. Pretty much all of these consist of uncritical reminiscences about the hippie movement, whose downfall, if we are to believe these people, apparently came only from its eventual invasion by those looking to get rich off the movement (i.e., the establishment), totally disregarding the fact that those hucksters and exploiters were there from the beginning within the movement. One thing that also bothered me is that the rampant drug use of the period was presented almost completely as a positive thing. Indeed, it was glorified. With the exception of mentioning that Syd Barrett apparently became emotionally unhinged at least in part due to his use of LSD, there is almost no mention of the lives destroyed by the hedonism and drug use of the period, including such famous rock pioneers as Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix, and Jim Morrison, to name the most prominent. While it was interesting and entertaining to read many of these reminiscences, I wanted to know more. I wanted the authors and editors to dig a bit deeper than the superficial outline of that period's history that we've heard about before. One good effort in that direction was the timeline that was at the bottom of every page, spanning the years from 1965-1969 throughout the course of the book. Basically, I recommend this book, but mainly for the great photo spreads and not as much for the commentaries and reminiscences.

i found that this was a wonderful book. i was not around during the sixties, but i have been in love with them for a while. this book is a great trip back to the sixties for those of us who weren't fortunate enough to be there, and i'm sure it is great memories for those who were. i would reccomend this book to anyone in search of information about the sixties/hippies. it is definately a must read!

This book is an excellent portrayal of life in the 60's. It is great nostalgia for those who were there, and a great taster for those who wish they were.

Miles' biography is intended for the general reader. There is good background on Burroughs' childhood, a good bit of biographical detail throughout, and the book doesn't delve into the written works all too deeply. Being one of three general biographies written about Burroughs, it bears comparing to the books by Ted Morgan and Graham Caveney. Miles' book is not as scholarly or exhaustive as Morgan's book, Literary Outlaw, but is both more scholarly and more exhaustive than Caveney's, Gentleman Junkie. It was written after Literary Outlaw, so there is more information on the Kansas years here, including a chapter entitled "Shotgun Art".

This is a biography intended for a general readership. Miles' familiarity with his subject may make this of interest even to the Burroughs beginner. There is a bibliography of works written by Burroughs (but none about him), and an index.

Miles seems to be Burroughs' biggest fan. This is not a critical appraisal of Burroughs OR his works. At times the writing is very bad. Still, Miles had the advantage of a fascinating subject.

If you haven't read a book about Burroughs before, read Literary Outlaw, by Ted Morgan, and pass this one up.

ken32

This was the first biography of Burroughs I read; I also have the Ted Morgan biography, but I don't think a direct qualitative comparison is possible. While Morgan goes into enormous biographical detail, Miles puts Burroughs' work in central position, and his analyses are really perceptive and thorough, with demonstrative use of passages from the text as well as references to relevant events in Burroughs' life. It is, as other reviewers have said, really the best existing introduction to Burroughs' work - I don't know if I could have made it through the cut-up trilogy without the preparation of reading this book first.

I should also point out that some biographical details are here which are not in Morgan, e.g. the use of real names where Morgan substituted pseudonyms.

Soon after I read this book, I tossed it out along with my retro polyester pants and orange creepers. The concept of the novel is a clever one and it starts out as being cute and funny. Even as a gay male, I could identify with Phoebe and a lot of her unwise choices in men.

Then somewhere along the line, the book loses what little bit of charm it has and suddenly you're finding yourself not liking Phoebe that much. As each man revolves his way through her life, you begin to dislike her and her choices more and more. Some of the boyfriends listed aren't even boyfriends but rather fantasy characters, penpals and in the case of Arnold Allen (the only Black guy who stereotypically appears on her list) a criminal. By the end of the novel you're thinking that she deserves everything that has happened to her. Some guys aren't good enough, others are too good and why doesn't she have any friends? One word for you Phoebe: THERAPY!!

At first I thought this was going to be a Sheila Levine for the new millenium. Whereas Sheila's self-depreciating humor and poor choices in men endeared you to her, Phoebe's self depreciating humor had you hoping she would grab a bottle of sleeping pills and end it all. I guess Mrs. Rosenfeld is a fairly talented writer as she was able to evoke such dislike for her protagonist from me, but overall this novel went absolutely nowhere and was a complete waste of my time. I liked Bridget Jones better and that's a stretch. I wouldn't really recommend this to book anyone. If you can find a copy, check out Gail Parent's 'Sheila Levine is Dead and Living in New York'. Although it's well over trhity years old now, it still maintains a crisp, hip, cutting edge feel to it unsurpassed by any other writer writing in the same vein as What She Saw.

Wherein we observe the development of a girl from 5th grade to about age 27, a girl that we eventually realize is quite attractive, though she has the persistent belief that she's a Dawn Weiner. It could make a great film. While I think Lucinda Rosenfeld has a good ear for dialogue and gives us painfully well-executed visuals, to the point where I felt I had been there myself (because, what young self-involved American female hasn't?) I thought the writing tired and too desperately-trying-to-be-trendy. It's the kind of book that would've made an impression about 10-15 years ago, but now the market is just too saturated, and let's face it - descriptive language a la Confederacy of Dunces has been immitated ad nauseum. Judging by the age of the character, Rosenfeld probably did write like this 10 years ago (in college), so it's too bad she didn't try to get it published then. Now, though, I think she'd be great writing for current female TV characters -- could give them something interesting for us to watch!

dreadful and fun is the conundrum i'm put in when i begin to go back through the quite thick entanglement of the boys, boys, and men i've dated, and in the book "what she saw", i was given the chance to delve into someone else's mess.

each chapter takes a look at a different boy/man the main character dated/went with/screwed. a fun idea, but there's such a distance on the page... it's difficult to understand her convictions. i wanted to laugh, and groan in aggreeance, but was left slightly unsympathetic and befuddled. the book begs to be written in the first person, but for some bizarre-o reason lucinda rosenfeld gave us a third person story.

after reading the first chapter i thought it was clunky, and decided to shut it for good, but i was at work, with nothing elese to read, so i kept going, and somehow fell in. i still didn't really like it, but felt hooked nonetheless. weird.

i gave it four stars due to the 'it hooked me factor;' what does it all mean? i suppose it's just as confusing as what she really did see in all of those guys.