|
Post by mrmustard on Oct 17, 2012 19:03:37 GMT
Tonight at 10pm on BBC radio there is a programme with Pete Best celebrating The Casbah club. It sounds great however I heard a promo for it and Bill Harry is being interviewed for the show and he states 'if there hadn't of been a Casbah club there would have been no Beatles.' I personally think thats totally inaccurate and complete nonsense and I am surprised this has come from Bill Harry. I know he is a member of the forum but I just can't see the importance of the Casbah in terms of the Beatles worldwide success. Yes, it's a club that should be celebrated but fundamental to The Beatles success?
Any comments on this?
|
|
|
Post by Amadeus on Oct 17, 2012 20:38:52 GMT
I got a comment. It's a 'what if' scenario. If it wasn't for the Casbah, they would never have met Pete (the greatest drummer ever) and since they had a hard time finding drummers, maybe they never would've got over to Germany and developed into what they did.
It's a rather huge part of the initial development of the band for that reason. We can't have any idea of 'what if' the Bests had never moved back from India.
Ringo was in a 'happening' band and wouldn't have given that 'non' group a second thought.
You pull the Casbah and all the connected events from The Beatles' story and you got a big blank space. Although they might have met another drummer eventually but we'll never know. It just happened the way it did and it was a huge part of the beginning.
|
|
|
Post by mrmustard on Oct 17, 2012 21:54:00 GMT
If you believe it's a 'Back To The Future' type scenario in that any change in any event would have affected the outcome then maybe.
What if Epstein would have been successful in RADA? What if George Martin would have stayed in the RAF? What if Nigel Whalley hadn't have got business cards printed up for the Quarry Men? What if Johnny Hutch would have joined The Beatles instead? What if Lennon hadn't have smashed Pete's washboard over his head?
Yes, in the realms of every event in history needing to happen for an outcome to occur then may be. But I think it's importance is being somewhat overstated here. I mean, I can't see the BBC sanctioning a load of 'what if' type programmes to explain the Beatles phenomenon.
|
|
|
Post by Amadeus on Oct 17, 2012 22:11:18 GMT
Yup. I follow yer. Just sayin' that if they didn't get the Hamburg chance to develop, none of the Epstein, Martin etc... would have happened. Just because the band became good in Germany because of the Casbah/Best connection.
However, I guess you could also say that, The Beatles most important event was John's parents splitting up. Otherwise, he wouldn't have been as screwed up as he subsequently was.
I think everyone can have their say about how important they think they were to The Beatles' story. It's a happy story. Allan Williams can say how important he thinks he was to their development. Alf Bicknell can say.. yada yada yada.
Pete Shotton can also say, if he wants to, that if Lennon didn't bust the washboard on his head, there would be no Beatles. Those things hurt you know! (the application of the washboard to the crown of the head.)
|
|
|
Post by mrmustard on Oct 17, 2012 22:25:28 GMT
The Hamburg connection is crucial to The Beatles history. The question is would they have got there anyway without Pete? I'm sure the lure of Hamburg would have attracted a lot of drummers. Off the top of my head they were the third Liverpool band to go there I think, so it was still a big thing to Liverpool bands.
However, your admission of Pete being the 'greatest drummer ever' clearly throws my argument out of the water!
|
|
|
Post by Amadeus on Oct 18, 2012 16:06:48 GMT
I Knew you'd come around.
|
|
|
Post by mrmustard on Oct 18, 2012 19:00:54 GMT
I Knew you'd come around. Erm..........I don't think so. I was being sarcastic with my last comment. I still think the statement that there would be no Beatles without the Casbah and further to this without Pete Best is just wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Amadeus on Oct 18, 2012 21:10:39 GMT
I Knew you'd come around. Erm..........I don't think so. I was being sarcastic with my last comment. I still think the statement that there would be no Beatles without the Casbah and further to this without Pete Best is just wrong. Erm......I was being sarcastic with MY comment. If electricity never got as far north as Liverpool, there would have been NO Beatles. Prove me wrong. By the way, Congratulations England, on reaching 800 miles of paved road. Progress.
|
|
|
Post by mrmustard on Oct 18, 2012 21:45:37 GMT
Erm......I was being sarcastic with MY comment. If electricity never got as far north as Liverpool, there would have been NO Beatles. Prove me wrong. By the way, Congratulations England, on reaching 800 miles of paved road. Progress. There was a move to stop electricity going to the North but Pete and Mona blocked the move, opened The Casbah, formed The Beatles, negotiated the record deal with Parlaphone, talked Ed Sullivan into having the Beatles on his show, inspired the Sgt Pepper album and caused the break up of The Beatles. Bloody hell! You're right! If it wasn't for Pete Best we wouldn't be having this conversation!!
|
|
|
Post by The Sun King on Oct 18, 2012 22:15:09 GMT
At the end of the day.Epstein signed the Beatles after seeing them in the Cavern. The casbah was just a stop on the long & winding road to the top. If the casbah wasn't there it would been somewhere else .Hamburg where they learnt their craft & honed their skills surely has more significance . In my humble opinion the casbah had no bearing on the beatles making it what so ever. Of course you can't take away how helpful Mona was to the Beatles. The Casbah gave them a foothold back in Liverpool.
|
|