DM's Beatles forums
A part of DM's Beatles site
Meet people from all over the World
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: Performing without John  (Read 2877 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

BlueMeanie

  • Guest
Performing without John
« on: July 17, 2007, 04:27:03 PM »
On March 12 and 13, 1963, The Beatles played in Bedford and York respectively, without John, who was suffering from a bad head cold. Has anyone ever seen any pictures of these performances? I don't ever recall seeing pictures of just the three of them on stage.
Logged

Kevin

  • That Means a Lot
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 5543
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #1 on: July 17, 2007, 04:35:07 PM »
What year Your Blueness?
Logged
don't follow leaders

BlueMeanie

  • Guest
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #2 on: July 17, 2007, 04:38:34 PM »
Quote from: 185
What year Your Blueness?

Oops, sorry. 1963.
Logged

Kevin

  • That Means a Lot
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 5543
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #3 on: July 17, 2007, 04:44:26 PM »
You'd feel cheated though wouldn't you? No one mocking the disabled! It just wouldn't be The Beatles.
Logged
don't follow leaders

harihead

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 2339
  • Keep spreading the love
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #4 on: July 17, 2007, 11:57:54 PM »
They probably got Neil to stand in for him.  ;D
Logged
All you've got to do is choose love.  That's how I live it now.  I learned a long time ago, I can feed the birds in my garden.  I can't feed them all. -- Ringo Starr, Rolling Stone magazine, May 2007<br />

The Fox Drummer

  • A Beginning
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 144
  • I'm a drummer, not a wetnurse.
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #5 on: July 18, 2007, 12:27:13 AM »
It mentioned it in the Anthology, but I think it would've showed pictures if they'd existed. So probably not.
Logged
<br />One thing I can tell you is you got to be free...

BlueMeanie

  • Guest
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #6 on: July 18, 2007, 09:03:20 AM »
Quote from: 551
They probably got Neil to stand in for him.  ;D

I've seen pictures of Mal Evans standing in for George during a rehearsal.
Logged

Bobber

  • Guest
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #7 on: July 18, 2007, 09:04:26 AM »
You're sure it wasn't Neil Aspinall for the Ed Sullivan Show rehearsals?
Logged

BlueMeanie

  • Guest
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #8 on: July 18, 2007, 09:09:38 AM »
Quote from: 63
You're sure it wasn't Neil Aspinall for the Ed Sullivan Show rehearsals?

I'm sure I remember him being short and stocky. I'll look it up in the book when I get a minute.
Logged

BlueMeanie

  • Guest
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #9 on: July 18, 2007, 10:51:17 AM »
You're right, damn you!!! ;)
Logged

The Fox Drummer

  • A Beginning
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 144
  • I'm a drummer, not a wetnurse.
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #10 on: July 19, 2007, 09:40:23 PM »
Haha, I have a great picture of Neil standing up at the microphone yelling at the crowd to send the cameramen away. John thought he looked like Hitler mid-rally...I must agree, he looks pretty insane as it was very windy and his hair is everywhere...
Logged
<br />One thing I can tell you is you got to be free...

alexis

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1860
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #11 on: July 24, 2007, 03:30:05 PM »
Quote from: 483
On March 12 and 13, 1963, The Beatles played in Bedford and York respectively, without John, who was suffering from a bad head cold. Has anyone ever seen any pictures of these performances? I don't ever recall seeing pictures of just the three of them on stage.


Bump for this one. I can't imagine that happening!
Logged
I love John,
I love Paul,
And George and Ringo,
I love them all!

Alexis

harihead

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 2339
  • Keep spreading the love
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #12 on: July 24, 2007, 03:39:00 PM »
I think it would be great! I mean, not that John wasn't there, but it would so obviously not be the Beatles. I can imagine the rest of them cutting up and making a huge jokes all through the performance-- perhaps deliberately butchering songs. It would have been hilarious! (Or so my imagination tells me...) :)
Logged
All you've got to do is choose love.  That's how I live it now.  I learned a long time ago, I can feed the birds in my garden.  I can't feed them all. -- Ringo Starr, Rolling Stone magazine, May 2007<br />

BlueMeanie

  • Guest
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #13 on: July 24, 2007, 03:43:46 PM »
Come on people, there must be some pictures somewhere?
Logged

dcowboys107

  • A Beginning
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 239
  • Surf's Up
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #14 on: July 24, 2007, 05:33:51 PM »
Did Mal and Neil know the guitar parts for the songs? Or did they just stand up there just to give the band 4 people?
Logged

BlueMeanie

  • Guest
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #15 on: July 25, 2007, 09:08:48 AM »
Quote from: 662
Did Mal and Neil know the guitar parts for the songs? Or did they just stand up there just to give the band 4 people?

Neil stood in for George during a camera rehearsal prior to a Johnny Carson show. George was their for the real thing.
Logged

alexis

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1860
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #16 on: July 26, 2007, 09:12:58 PM »
I'm gonna bump in case some new reader MIGHT happen to have some pics!
Logged
I love John,
I love Paul,
And George and Ringo,
I love them all!

Alexis

Bobber

  • Guest
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #17 on: July 27, 2007, 06:55:07 AM »
Quote from: 483
On March 12 and 13, 1963, The Beatles played in Bedford and York respectively, without John, who was suffering from a bad head cold. Has anyone ever seen any pictures of these performances? I don't ever recall seeing pictures of just the three of them on stage.

Mark Lewisohn added March 14. So it's three nights without John.
Logged

BlueMeanie

  • Guest
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #18 on: July 27, 2007, 07:51:10 AM »
Quote from: 63

Mark Lewisohn added March 14. So it's three nights without John.

Even more reason for there to be pictures. I'm amazed that no press photo's have surfaced.
Logged

Bobber

  • Guest
Re: Performing without John
« Reply #19 on: July 27, 2007, 08:08:47 AM »
I looked in some archivebooks of the newspapers. But most of them started covering the Beatles on a continuing base from the second half of 1963, when Beatlemania was really in control of the UK. These early 1963-concerts remained unnoticed by the big papers. Still, it would be strange if there wouldn't be a picture at all.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2
« previous next »
 

Page created in 0.239 seconds with 76 queries.