Would Sgt. Pepper's Have Been Very Different?

admin · Post by **admin** » Mon May 26, 2003 6:09 am

The track listing for Sgt. Peppers follows.

1. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band
2. With a Little Help from My Friends
3. Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds
4. Getting Better
5. Fixing a Hole
6. She's Leaving Home
7. Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite
8. Within You, Without You
9. When I'm Sixty-Four
10. Lovely Rita
11. Good Morning, Good Morning
12. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (Reprise)
13. Day in the Life[/size]

Strawberry Fields Forever and Penny Lane were recorded with the view that they might appear on the album. Wanting to keep things active, these songs were released on a single prrior to the Album releasr. My question is, would the album been any different had these songs been included on it. Moreover, which two of the existing 13 songs, listed above, wold have been deleted to make room for these standout numbers.

I reckon that Within You Without You and When I'm Sixty Four might not have made it. The result, overall would have been a different album with a different feel. What do you think?

shamustwin · Post by **shamustwin** » Mon May 26, 2003 8:01 am

"WYWY" probably would have stayed, they had a tendancy to "allow" GH at least a song per LP. Besides, that Indian trip was very hot then. It was a song I always skipped as a lad, but now I love it. "Leaving Home", yeah, out. Wasn't recorded at Abbey Road, G. Martin didn't arrange the strings (Paulie did) and it's a drag, a well known drag. My bet for one of the others would be "Rita" or "Sixty-four" (most likely "Rita"), just 'cause Lennon reportedly got on Mac's case a lot about light-weight stuff (see: Abbey Road, the album). "Fixing", great solo (by Paul?) "Getting Better", Lennon liked his contribution ("can't get no worse"). I doubt Lennon's stuff would go. "Good Morning..." maybe a filler by John, but time changes are great, and they probably would want to show those off (as in "Good Day Sunshine" and "Tommorow Never Knows").

I think "The White Album" would have been better as a single, rather than double album. After this thread, let's "half" at that one!

shamustwin · Post by **shamustwin** » Mon May 26, 2003 8:10 am

P.S., sorry to ramble (the fabs being my fave subject)...The addition of "S.F." and "P.L" would have made for a much heavier album. Perhaps part of the appeal at the time of Sgt Pepper was the bouyancy, popiness. And the "Fields/Lane" single didn't got to #1 here (first time since...)

simer4001 · Post by **simer4001** » Tue May 27, 2003 2:09 pm

I think Sgt. Peppers, and the reprise would not have been included. The album started off with SFF and Penny Lane until pulled. The theme for the album was supposed to be an album of childhood memories or experiences. The Sgt.Pepper theme came much later. In fact Lovely Rita was recorded at the same time as SFF and Penny Lane. Just a guess.

larrywassgren · Post by **larrywassgren** » Tue May 27, 2003 3:18 pm

Good point Brian! You're correct that Strawberry Fields Forever and Penny Lane were John and Paul writing about childhood memories and experiences. For Sgt.Pepper they were burying their past(The Beatles) and that made it even easier for them to experiment on this record, that's why it's so different(and great). When I first heard it in the 60's it did sound like a totally different band but of course now we listen to it as The Beatles! It was ground-breaking and I'm sure glad I wouldn't have to make the decision as to what two songs to leave off Sgt. Pepper to add SFF and Penny Lane. Personally, I like Magical Mystery Tour better than Sgt.Pepper. It's one of my favorite Beatle albums, I just like the whole concept of the album and that great book that was included in the package.

grsnovi · Post by **grsnovi** » Tue May 27, 2003 3:34 pm

Wasn't the whole "conceptness" part of the big deal? Like - it was the FIRST "concept" LP?

Larry - wasn't "the book" in MMT? MMT was an EP "over there" made into an LP stateside.

SgtP had the insert with the cut-outs (at least in the states).

larrywassgren · Post by **larrywassgren** » Tue May 27, 2003 3:55 pm

Gary, I was talking about the concept of Magical Mystery Tour(the idea of getting a bus, a bunch of people together and filming the whole thing) and yes the book came in Magical Mystery Tour. Sgt.Pepper would be the first Beatle LP called a concept album but to me they were all concept albums. The Beatles were very specific about the order of songs on even their first album. The US kept holding a couple off each album until they had enough to put out one extra album(and make more money!). Isn't that why The Beatles put out the Butcher Cover, because Capitol in the USA was butchering their albums?

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu May 29, 2003 3:28 am

Isn't that why The Beatles put out the Butcher Cover, because Capitol in the USA was butchering their albums? Larry Wassgren

Larry I used to think this until and oral history of the Beatles a couple of years back. It would seem that there is at least one other explanation for the Butcher Cover. Bob Whitaker, in the Pritchard and Lysaght text comments

It was the spring of 1966, and I felt The Beatles needed a new approach with their image. I wanted to do a real experiment with them. People will jump to the wrong conclusions about it being sick, but the whole thing was based on simplicity, linking four very real people with something real. I got George to pretend to knock some nails into John's head and took some sauges along to get some other kinds of pictures. They turned out well. I also created some strnge shots with dolls and eyes. I dressed them up in white smocks as butchers, and it was decided to use those pictures. The use of the camera as a means of creating situations worked very well with them.

The original cover concept never really materialized. It was meant to be a double folded album where the front showed the four Beatles holding sausages, which would have stood for an umbilical cord. Therefore, each of THe Beatles would be linked to a woman by means of these sausages. Now this woman was going to be inside the double-album cover and there was going to be people blowing trumpets announcing the birth of The Beatles and all kinds of surreal, far-out images.

I was completely surprised when they used the picture of the butcher smocks and the meat pieces for the American LP. Paul was asked about the pictures and said 'Very tasty meat.' George said 'We won't come to any more of your sick picture sessions, Bob.' John said 'Oh, we don't mind doing anything.' And Ringo said 'We haven't done pictures like this before.' Speculation circulated in the media that The Beatles were asked by Capitol in America for a picture for their new "filler" album between Rubber Soul and Revolver, and The Beatles thought they would play a little joke on them by sending this special print for the album Yesterday and Today. Whether is was public reaction or whether Capitol found out about the prank isn't known, but the cover was replaced very quickly in the States

While the Beatles did comments that their track listing was butchered in America, I am thinking that the photo session described by Whitaker was not done for the expressed purpose of raising Capitol's awareness. It may be yet another random activity of The Beatles' life that we have given too much meaning.

shamustwin · Post by **shamustwin** » Thu May 29, 2003 4:23 am

Peter - that last line "...another random activity..." is one of the truest statements I've read. So much of what went on, even "happy accidents" in their, and other's, careers are taken apart and analyzed and given meanings where originally there were none. Sometimes things just happen and later myths are built around these. That's part of the fun of being a fan too, though. Especially when the truth comes out and bubbles are burst!

larrywassgren · Post by **larrywassgren** » Thu May 29, 2003 12:09 pm

Yes Peter, I've read what he said but that's his side to the story. If you read the next two passages in the book George says, 'So if we put out two singles and two albums, they'd convert them to three albums by keeping the extra tracks. So they were different over here. We started to put our foot down...'. John Lennon said 'We would carefully sequence the material, you know, the songs, and have it just the way we felt it should sound for an album. We would put a lot of thought and work into the process and then we'd come over to America....and hear what they had done and it would drive us crazy!' It could be just a lucky coincidence that the photographer decided to take the Butcher shot, but I feel The Beatles knew exactly what they were doing by sending the Butcher picture over here for Capital to use on the cover of Yesterday and Today. They didn't 'butcher' anymore of their albums after that so it definitely got the point across. The Beatles always had a cool way of getting their message heard.

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu May 29, 2003 12:18 pm

Larry: I read these passages, but don't you think if The Beatles solution was to send this message through an album cover that either George or John would have acknowledged this in there statements relating to the sequencing of the Fab Four material. There is no mention of butcher photo or of "butchering" their albums in the statements to which you refer.

larrywassgren · Post by **larrywassgren** » Thu May 29, 2003 1:32 pm

Peter, both John and George mention being very irritated(drives us crazy!) by what Capital was doing and I'm sure Paul would have agreed with that too. The way I see it is they finally became so annoyed with this they 'put their foot down' in their own way by sending the butcher shot over for the cover. I think The Beatles were cool enough to let us figure this out for ourselves and probably wouldn't mention it again. I also feel that the chances of this being a coincidence(to put them in butcher outfits, with meat, etc., on the cover of this hold over album) are not great, backed up by what The Beatles have said above.

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu May 29, 2003 1:52 pm

Your points are well taken. What would be the motivation for a well-known British photographer, Bob Whitaker, to hide these facts if the Beatles had asked him to shoot such themes. Should we discount his version of the events, that it was his creation? Did the Beatles decide to use these photos only as an after thought? And why did George consider it sick? I don't know Larry, I think this may have been a happy accident that was coincidental. There is some interesting information here.

shamustwin · Post by **shamustwin** » Thu May 29, 2003 3:22 pm

So, is there a subliminal message in the (bland) "Trunk" cover which replaced the "Butcher" cover?

larrywassgren · Post by **larrywassgren** » Thu May 29, 2003 3:32 pm

Your points are well taken too Peter. Rereading the Bob Whitaker description it sounds a little like he is talking like the sausage! The Beatles holding sausages which stood for an umbilical cord, linked to a woman by means of these sausages. Give me a break. The double album was supposed to announce the birth of The Beatles. Sounds like he's relating his story to Sgt.Pepper, which actually has the old Beatles waving good-bye and the new Beatles coming in. I just think that too many years after the fact people start to enhance their story. He does admit that his original idea for the album cover was shelved, and for good reason I believe as The Beatles knew it wouldn't be cool. Then along comes the idea to use one photo because of the butchering of their albums. If it was a total coincidence(that I personally don't believe) it would have to be just another amazing, unbelievable thing that's happened in The Beatles career.