5 comments about In My Life: The Brian Epstein Story.

1. I agree with the earlier reviewer's incredulous comments about the cover of this book. If the publisher wanted to make browsers think twice about a purchase, they've done it.

   But despite the cheesy cover, I went ahead with my purchase & was not disappointed. One would think that just about every aspect of the Beatles has been absolutely covered and trampled to death. Then along comes Debbie Geller with this gem - the Brian Epstein angle has been an untapped vein up until this point. It's not so much a traditional book about her subject as it is an oral history. Geller's coup is to get Paul McCartney - among many other voices - to comment at length on Epstein's role with the group.

   The book's main themes and premises, of which a strong case is made by all the book's participants:

   1. There would be no Beatles without Epstein. During the very early sixties when they were no more than a crude band distinguished only by their Hamburg experience, Epstein's belief in 'his boys' was indefatigable. He created a new image for them, and sold that image - after much rejection - to London.

   2. Epstein created rock and roll management and promotion as we know it today; it simply did not exist before he came along, & it is around today mainly in the guise that he created.

   3. Epstein was a terribly complex and conflicted man. No one participating in this project makes the case that he was 'nice' or easy to get along with. In fact, he comes across as a holy terror at times. Jewish in a non-Jewish world, openly gay prior to any societal openness on that front, a manic-depressive (some posit) before a clinical diagnosis for such an afflication existed, addicted to various uppers and downers.

   This was a terribly complex, troubled - but enormously gifted - man. To think that he fit all he did into 32 short years. Amazing.

   Thank you Debbie Geller for honoring this blazing comet named Brian Espstein, who willed the Beatles into this world.




2. It's been a few years since I've read any 'Beatle' books. (I had my fanatical Beatle phase in high school in the 80's.) But, something about this book drew me, so I bought it.

   I think it's great at filling in some holes in the Beatle mythology. Brian's talents are very fully explained. His weaknesses are, too. Therefore, for the first time, he comes across as a more complete person.

   He was obviously ahead of his time in terms of the music business. His artists loved him and respected him, but they didn't fear him.

   It's interesting that after all this time, there's still conflict about his demise--did he or didn't he kill himself. It reminds me a bit of the Michael Hutchence accidental/suicide death.

   I like the style of the book--the oral history with additional explanation. It leaves the history to the people who were there.




3. Even after reading Bob Spitz' encyclopedic, "The Beatles," this collection of BBC interviews by those who knew Brian Epstein best comes across as fresh. There's not much narrative here. Almost everything comes from transcribed quotes off a TV documentary. But the sources are perfect: Paul McCartney, Derek and Alistair Taylor, Sid Bernstein, and assorted chauffers, gofers, lawyers and business people who worked with and knew Brian Epstein as well as that enigmatic gay man of the uptight 50s and early 60s could be known. Way ahead of his time, Epstein is seen as inventing the modern rock star, an astonishing feat for a record store clerk from Liverpool, albeit a well educated, rich one. Epstein screwed up the Beatles' merchandising deals, yes, but don't weep too much over that. They went on to make quite a few quid after all. The odd thing is Epstein never really liked this type of music. Sibelius was his 'desert island' music of choice. Maybe that helped him see his job more clearly. This is an illuminating bio well worth reading if you are even just a casual Beatles historian.



4. Lots of useful information gathered here, but it would have been much better presented as a narrative than as a series of quotations. Facts and opinions by the barrelful, but where's the art?



5. Going into this book I didn't know much about Brian Epstein, but I was interested in the Beatles, and wanted to learn more about them. This book really gave me a behind the scenes look into what truly remarkable things this man did for The Beatles. Once I began to read it, I was absorbed and didn't want to put it down. It was interesting and entertaining, as well. Brian Epstein was a great manager and this book gave an inside look into his life and work.

No comments about In-N-Out Burger: A Behind-the-Counter Look at the Fast-Food Chain that Breaks All the Rules.

5 comments about Keys to the Kingdom: The Rise of Michael Eisner and the Fall of Everybody Else.

1. Some may say that Masters' book is biased against Eisner, but she does nothing except reiterate the feelings about him that have been voiced by many others in other forums. Maybe you want to give him the benefit of the doubt, but the duplicity, wishy-washiness, undercutting, second-guessing, micro-management and all around malevolence that is evidenced shows that's pretty much impossible. What we can't figure out is just why he is the way he is? Why does he casually cast aside decades-long friendships? Why doesn't he cultivate relationships with valuable talent instead of alienating them? What is most important to him that would cause him to make some the decisions he does? Eisner seems to be capable of cutting off his nose to spite his face--he fails to do things that would be beneficial to the company's bottom line which is what he claims to be most interested in. It doesn't add up. Still, it is fun reading about the Paramount years, the Katzenberg trial, etc. At this point in time (summer of 2002) when many believe Eisner is in danger of losing his job, this book gives us as much insight as possible as to the inner workings of Eisner's brain.
   instead of burning



2. Oh Lord, this book is so unbelievably frustrating....more than any book I've ever read. Eisner, his life and his actions are so completely fascinating and Masters somehow manages to take all this great material and make it mind-numbingly boring...what was she thinking? That you could write a "nuanced" portrait of someone by throwing in hot gossip, sound bites, bits of articles from Time and Newsweek, as well as a bunch of stories that don't remotely relate to the main subject but are "dishy"? There was so much I wanted to know as I read this book, so many questions I had and she didn't answer any of them. Masters discusses Eisner's charm vs. his ruthlessness, she brings up provacative examples of his relationship to his family, his friends and his colleagues, and then steamrolls all of them by emphasizing how "aloof" he is and "imperial." Doesn't she know that when sketching a complicated portrait of someone, you can't just throw a bunch of facts around but you have to maintain interest by putting them TOGETHER to form a PERSPECTIVE, a CONTEXT. Much more time should have been spent on Eisner's days at Disney (rather than the completely gratuitous tales of his time at Paramount, and Star Trek, and Nimoy, and Gene Roddenberry, and Don Simpson, and Barry Diller, and...well you get the picture). I liked the parts about his childhood and his relationship to his parents, they should have been given much more space...but the biggest flaw of this book is the lack of info on the Eisner-Katzenberg relationship. Sure, Masters give plenty of space to financial issues about Katzenberg's bonus, but aside from Wall Street enthusiasts, who the hell cares? She COMPLETELY glosses over the roots of the Eisner-Katzenberg bond, and we never get an idea of WHY IN THE WORLD DID THESE TWO PEOPLE REMAIN TOGETHER FOR 19 YEARS IF THEY WERE SUCH ENEMIES? What held them together? How exactly did they meet? She talks about how Katzenberg was won over, like others, by Eisner's self-deprecating charm and his (Eisner's) confidence in him, about Katzenberg's not-so-great childhood and his problems with his own parents (very vague descriptions there as well) and how Katzenberg constantly "sought Eisner's approval". Why? What did Eisner offer him that no one else did? Why did Katzenberg follow Eisner from Paramount to Disney? She spends a whole lot of time talking (in a dry, Variety-kind-of-way) about the break-up, but the real question she (and other writers) have often missed is NOT why this relationship crashed and burned but why it was born in the first place. Why did Eisner need Katzenberg? Why did Katzenberg become so enamoured with animation, with his role at Disney, with a potential role as Eisner's number 2? These people are not carbon cut-outs, they are people. They are fascinating, complex characters and Masters gives them with about as much focus as subjects of an obituary. She seems more interested in how much money Captain EO lost, how much money Eisner allegedly cheated certain people out of, how much money Eisner paid Michael Ovitz, how much money Katzenberg wanted, how pissed Leonard Nimoy was at Paramount, what a disaster Star Trek: The Motion Picture was to produce. I don't know about you, but I didn't pick that book up to learn about this stuff. It's SO DIFFICULT to really learn about these people (Eisner and Katzenberg) despite their famous "relationship" or "feud" extremely little is really written about their interactions together as people...you have to research a ton of articles to even find out anything...this is such an interesting subject but whatever Master's knows that the rest of us don't, she isn't sharing. Her book (like many articles) unfortunately is pervaded with the "Everyone knows this" kind of tone that drives me nuts...well, I'm not a Hollywood producer, or director, or actor. I've never met either of these people, but that's why I'm interested! People buy books on Spielberg because they're interested, why the hypocricy? Masters book is slanted, glib, gossipy, disorganized, unfocused,and worst of all, insulting to the reader.



3. Keys to the Kingdom predicted the current situation at Disney with remarkable accuracy. The insights about Michael Eisner turned out to be right on the mark.



4. A very well written account of the movie business--detailing a lot of the major players. Discussion how decisions are made and how grown men act like little boys most of the time. This industry is ruthless and this book gives the reader on all the inside scoop about how that happens. A fascinating read. The pictures stink but thats ok.



5. Although covering the same story this was a good companion read to Disney War by James B. Stewart. Disney War covered the Disney board revolt, animation under Katzenberg and ABC in much more detail than this book. However, The Keys to the Kingdom added much more detail on Eisners years at ABC and Paramount in much more detail which provided greater evidence of Eisner's success when completely focused on the creative aspects of television/movies. This success was contrasted with his failures when he had to take on leadership and operational roles while dangerously dabbling/micromanaging in the creative aspects during his last 10 years at Disney. This book also provides a good look at the downfall of Eisner just like Disney War due to his isolation and fear of strong leadership reporting to him. Anyone interested in Disney, Eisner, and the television/movie industry should read both!

No comments about Robert Worth Bingham and the Southern Mystique: From the Old South to the New South and Beyond.

No comments about Sir William Lyons: The Official Biography.

No comments about George Westinghouse: His Life and Achievements.

No comments about Across Fortune's Tracks: A Biography of William Rand Kenan Jr..

No comments about The Life and Economics of David Ricardo.

No comments about In the Company of Writers: A Life In Publishing.

No comments about F.K. Weyerhaeuser: A Biography.