#Pauline Sutcliffe

[ceofjohnlennon]

"John might as well have worn a sandwich board announcing the end of the world, so clearly was he dressed for attention. His jeans were the tightest anywhere – he only got out of Mimi's house by wearing a pair of flannels over them, taking them off on his way to college and shoving them in a shoulder bag – and he had a long, frocked black jacket, like a Mississippi gambler. He wore it all with a swagger, with self-assurance camouflaging all his insecurities. Stuart, who adopted his own individual style, dressed for himself – who but a few intimates would see his red underpants? Stuart was impressed by him, and even more so when he heard about John's group, the Quarrymen, named after the Quarry Bank High School that John and the original band members had attended. But the band was not the main attraction. John was overtly anarchic, whereas Stuart's anarchy was expressed by pushing artistic boundaries, painting large works when he should have been doing small-scale material. Stuart's rebellion was mostly acceptable, whereas John's sometimes wasn't. We are all shocked and appalled by wild behaviour, but we are also excited and fascinated by it. John was also very, very funny. Stuart loved that and could keep up with it. There was a lot of banter between them, each of them always trying to get the better line. Once, round at our house, John said to me, 'You know, your brother's a little genius.' I got back quickly, 'He thinks you're a big genius.' His smile embraced me. John was also very dangerous, and there is a kind of excitement about that too. That unpredictability. In their banter John could be very cruel but, like a strong parent, Stuart contained that, which also made John feel safe."

ㅡ From the book "The Beatles' Shadow" by Pauline Sutcliffe.

[eppysboys]

Portion of a letter written by Stuart Sutcliffe to his mother, Millie.

Dear Mum,

How are you again? I hope well and honestly not to [sic] upset by my last letter. Its nothing really. I do funny little stomache [sic] exercises every morning after I've taken medicine. Anyway believe me I feel much better than for a long time. I go every day in the college while Prollzi [sic]-

-

"Stuart's letters to Mother varied between 'I think I'm very ill, I can't sleep, I can't think, I've got these crushing headaches.' Next, she would recieve a letter saying he felt fine: 'I think it's over and don't get upset, don't fuss, don't do anything.' ... My mother, understandably, was one live nerve end." Pauline Sutcliffe.

[kaiserkeller]

to this day i still can’t believe pauline sutcliffe tried to fool the world into thinking that recording of ‘love me tender’ was by stuart… chelsea come on now!

[gardenwalrus]

BBC4 Documentary, Stuart Sutcliffe: the Lost Beatle (2008) - discussion of whether there was a homosexual nature to John Lennon and Stuart Sutcliffe's relationship, and allegations made in Pauline Sutcliffe's book The Beatles Shadow that Stuart's brain haemorrhage was possibly caused by a physical fight with John a year prior

[In order of first appearance - Astrid Kirchherr, Pauline Sutcliffe, Tony Sheridan, Alan Williams (the Beatles' first manager), Horst Fascher (friend of the Beatles and club manager)]

[undying-love]

🤔

"Was John gay? A question mark has been set against his sexuality. Pauline Sutcliffe has suggested John had a love affair of sorts with her brother, Stuart; while John's school friend Pete Shotton has affirmed that John told him he'd had sexual contact with Brian Epstein in Spain. [...] This is only relevant in as much as what stock Paul McCartney puts in such stories about his best friend and, on balance, he rejects suggestions John was homosexual, not least because he and John spent countless nights together in hotels on the road, 'and there was never any hint that he was gay'. Certainly the suggestion has never been made about McCartney himself."

Fab : An Intimate Life of Paul McCartney, by Howard Sounes

[thebeatles]

Everybody says I sing it better than Elvis [ “Love Me Tender”]…. Just before I sing, I receive the best applause of the night. Minutes after I finish singing the people all look at me with sad eyes and sad looks on their faces. Recently, I’ve become very popular both with girls and homosexuals who tell me I’m the sweetest, most beautiful boy…. Also it appears that people refer to me as the James Dean of Hamburg.

-Stu Sutcliffe in his letters [from Hamburg] to Pauline. From Bob Spitz' The Beatles: The Biography (2005). (Pg. 242)

[wingsoverlagos]

Lewisohn vs. Cynthia Pt. 3 of 3

Part 1 // Part 2 // Other Sources

Quite by accident, this final section of citations from Tune In referencing Cynthia Lennon's memoirs have something of a theme. There are three citations of A Twist of Lennon (1978, aka Twist) and two to John (2005) to dissect here, and all but one have a commonality: the cited source is either altered or directly contradicted in Tune In.

The odd citation out is the one I'll deal with first, and then we'll dive into the citing-a-source-that-contradicts-what-you-wrote section under the cut. This first citation includes a classic Lewisohn Donut, in which he omits a section of the source quote without using an ellipsis to indicate it. When comparing Tune In to the source, this wasn't my biggest takeaway; what was far more glaring was the context Lewisohn had chosen to cut when adapting the anecdote for his book. Let's get into it.

John p.38 vs. Tune In 11-53

The topic here is John hitting Cyn, so there's a lot to unpack. We'll start with the usual citation comparison, and then we'll zoom out to see what Lewisohn does and doesn't include as context. Here's the source:

And here's Tune In:

Immediately, we see that Lewisohn has omitted a large part of the source without indication, and smushed two different sentences together into one. He should not do this, but, honestly, I was just glad Lewisohn covered John's history of domestic violence instead of glossing over it, so I wasn't too fussed...until I looked at the broader context in Tune In.

Lewisohn is skirting a hairsbreadth away from two pertinent stories. Here's the leadup to the quote used above, where Lewisohn describes the events that led John to slap Cyn:

There’s the quote we just looked at in green at the bottom, with some pertinent context highlighted in pink at the top—we’ll get to the world’s ugliest orange circle in a second.

John was insecure, so he hit Cyn when she danced with a man at a party. “The exact circumstances have varied with retelling,” Lewisohn tells us. Maybe that’s true. If you folks are aware of other versions of this story, please let me know—they may well be floating around! Here’s how Cyn describes it in John (p.37):

Two notable details here that didn't make it into Tune In: Cyn's head being knocked into pipes when John hit her, and the identity of the man she was dancing with: Stuart Sutcliffe.

Even if the details are different in other accounts, it is absolutely WILD to me that Lewisohn wouldn't mention that the cause for John's jealousy, according to Cyn's account, was Stuart. Even if he can't be 100% certain, would it not be worth mentioning that Cyn herself says Stuart was the man she was dancing with when John became incensed?

John’s relationship with Stuart was hugely important and influential in this period of John’s life. Lewisohn doesn't have to state it as fact, but I'm gobsmacked he wouldn't mention the strong possibility that John was enraged by Cyn dancing with his best friend. For someone as jealous and insecure as nineteen-year-old John Lennon, would that not have some lasting effects on his feelings towards Stu? Given how central the John-Stuart relationship is in Tune In, I don't know why Lewisohn wouldn't at least take a sentence or two to explore this possibility and the repercussions it might have had on their dynamic. Maybe this influenced John bullying Stu, or the purported attack on Stu described by Pauline Sutcliffe? Is none of this worth mentioning?

Now, the ugly orange circle. That citation refers to a passage in Hunter Davies' The Beatles (1968) where John and Cyn discuss his violent behavior. Here's some of that section from Davies (1968) p.52-3.

The quote Lewisohn uses is underlined with orange. If you read down to the pink-underlined passage, you'll see an account of John's violence towards Cynthia.

This is a very different account than the one we see in John or Tune In. This incident is distinct enough that I doubt it’s a retelling of the jealousy-induced slap described in Tune In, so there’s a inconsistency here: either the abuse in Hunter Davies’ work didn’t happen, or Cyn’s assertion that the art school slap was the single time John hit her isn’t entirely true.

I’m not trying to attack Cyn’s credibility or honesty in recounting her abuse, but I lean towards her downplaying events in her 2005 memoir. This might be a conscious choice—her ex-husband had since been martyred, and perhaps she didn’t want to tarnish his memory, or dredge up unwanted controversy that might affect her son—or a reflection of the amount of time that had passed, nearly 40 years since she and John got divorced. I don’t see a reason to disbelieve the story in Hunter Davies—John read the manuscript and had to sign off on it, so he could have had the story removed.

Lewisohn is certainly aware of this passage. In addition to the “I was just hysterical bit,” he cites the paragraph directly after Cyn’s account of John hitting her elsewhere in Tune In (see citation 10-10). I’m sure Lewisohn has his reasons for favoring the account from John, but I worry those reasons stem from trying to make John look as good as possible, not from trying to portray the most historically accurate version of events.

Twist p.80-82 vs. Tune In 31-12

(p.81 and p.82 pictured below)

Onto the wedding of John and Cyn. There are two issues here.

First, the witnesses. Cyn gives her brother and sister-in-law as witnesses; Lewisohn gives Paul and Cyn’s sister-in-law as witnesses. I would not be at all surprised if Lewisohn has the facts straight here—Cyn actually gives the wrong year for her wedding on p.80 of Twist—but Lewisohn only gives Cyn’s memoir as a source for “[d]etails of the wedding.” Don’t cite something with a source that contradicts it.

The second bit I’d like to discuss is the description of John et al. in the waiting room before the wedding, highlighted/underlined in purple. This isn’t straight CTRL+C/CTRL-V plagiarism, but Lewisohn leaned heavily on Cyn’s phrasing and word choice here, switching around a few clauses and molding two sections into one. He’s changed this passage less than many of the passages he actually quotes, so I’m not sure why he didn’t put this one in quotes as well.

Twist p.84-87 vs. Tune In 33-35

This passage mostly lines up with the account in Twist, but the highlighted section stuck out to me: Cyn never mentions Dot living in the same building as her at this point. By Cyn’s account, after Paul broke up with Dot, Dot moved out of the bedsit where she and Cyn were neighbors, and the two barely saw each other. Here’s Cyn on p.77 of Twist:

Cyn also doesn’t mention Dot’s residency in the basement flat in John (2005)—but it seems she got the story wrong. On the It’s Only Love webpage (see Lewisohn vs. Cynthia Part 2 for some discussion about this source), there’s a quote from Dot about living in the flat beneath Cyn and John’s. In Bob Spitz’s The Beatles: The Biography (2005), he also says that Dot lived in the basement flat based on an interview he conducted with her. He even says that John helped Dot with rent! (Spitz 2005 p.357)

Don’t take this as an endorsement of Spitz’s version of events—I’m not going to write several pedantic tumblr posts criticizing Mark Lewisohn only to uphold Bob Spitz as a paragon of truth! But Cyn is fallible, and there are at least two sources out there that contradict her version of events. The problem here is that Lewisohn only cites Twist for his passage about the Falkner Street flat. You can’t credit information to a source that directly contradicts that information.

Hmmm, there’s a word for using information from a source without proper attribution, but I can’t quite put my finger on it. I think it starts with ‘P’…

Twist p.87 vs. Tune In 33-37

Lewisohn uses Twist as his source for the section of Tune In where John and Cyn move to Mendips. The difference lies in how that move came about. Cyn says that she encouraged John to visit Mimi since she hated to see family members fall out, then credits Mimi as proposing they move in when she hears about their current living situation. In Lewisohn’s version, John makes the request.

We’ve established that Cyn got some facts wrong in Twist (though not more than one might expect in a Beatles autobiography), so she might have things mixed up here. I know I’m a broken record at this point, but Lewisohn needs to cite his source if he has contradictory information here.

In this case, I think Cyn probably has things right. If you read her memoirs, it is clear that Cyn does not like Mimi, and she doesn’t hide this. I don’t think she would give Mimi credit for a generous act like this if it didn’t happen that way—but that’s just my sense of things, and rather beside the point.

John p.29-30 vs. Tune In 11-21

A minor change, but Cyn’s account has Mimi instigating the fight with Lil only joining when provoked, while Lewisohn draws no distinction between the roles the women played in the argument.

Thank you for reading! Next up...maybe All You Need Is Ears?

Sources:

Davies H. 1968. 2009 Edition. The Beatles. New York (NY): W.W. Norton & Company. 408p.

It's Only Love [Internet]. c2005? Dot Rhone. [cited 2024 Feb 2]. Available from: https://sentstarr.tripod.com/beatgirls/rhone.html

Lennon C. 1978. A Twist of Lennon. New York (NY): Avon Books. 190p.

Lennon C. 2005. 1st American Edition. John. New York (NY): Crown Publishers. 294p.

Spitz B. 2005. The Beatles: The Biography. New York (NY): Little, Brown and Company. 984p. [ebook]

[muzaktomyears]

I know there's a lot of answers out there for this question, but personally like what do you think are the best beatle books to read? Like what's the best for you?

hello anon! I'm hyperfixated so I'll read pretty much anything on them tbh. I do like to read the more anecdotal stuff because I love gossip lol - and some of them can be so revealing (both of the Beatles themselves and the authors). But I'll read and have enjoyed lots of stuff: the big biogs, memoirs, fan accounts, academic studies, that novel by Paul's ex publicist.

anyway, here's the list of Beatles books I've read all the way through and what rating out of 5 I'd give them. The books I've rated highest have generally been the big biographies just because I think they tend to say more and tell a fuller story, since obvs that's their purpose, so they're a more satisfying read. My ratings are based on a random combo of what they can tell us about the Beatles, how interesting I find them historiographically/as Beatles reception, and how much I enjoyed reading them.

★★★★★

One Two Three Four: The Beatles in Time (Craig Brown)

The Beatles: The Authorised Biography (Hunter Davies)

Shout!: The True Story of the Beatles (Philip Norman)

Love Me Do!: The Beatles' Progress (Michael Braun)

Can't Buy Me Love: The Beatles, Britain, and America (Jonathan Gould)

The Man Who Gave the Beatles Away: The Amazing True Story of the Beatles' Early Years (Allan Williams & William Marshall)

★★★★☆

The Love you Make: An Insider's Story of the Beatles (Peter Brown & Steven Gaines)

Backbeat: Stuart Sutcliffe - The Lost Beatle (Alan Clayson & Pauline Sutcliffe)

The Gospel According to the Beatles (Steve Turner)

Lennon vs. McCartney: The Beatles, Inter-band Relationships and the Hidden Messages to Each Other in Their Song Lyrics (Adam Thomas)

Beatle! The Pete Best Story (Pete Best & Patrick Doncaster)

Dreaming the Beatles: The Love Story of One Band and the Whole World (Rob Sheffield)

A Cellarful of Noise (Brian Epstein)

Waiting for the Beatles: An Apple Scruff's Story (Carol Bedford)

John (Cynthia Lennon)

John Lennon: In My Life (Pete Shotton & Nicholas Schaffner)

Summer of Love: The Making of Sgt. Pepper (George Martin with William Pearson)

★★★☆☆

John, Paul & Me Before the Beatles: The True Story of the Very Early Days (Len Garry)

The Beatles and Me on Tour (Ivor Davis)

A Twist of Lennon (Cynthia Lennon)

At the Apple's Core: The Beatles from the Inside (Denis O'Dell with Bob Neaverson)

The Guitar's All Right as a Hobby, John (Kathy Burns)

With the Beatles (Alistair Taylor)

The Day John Met Paul: An Hour-By-Hour Account of How the Beatles Began (Jim O'Donnell)

The Beatles: I Was There (Richard Houghton)

All Our Loving: A Beatle Fan's Memoir (Carolyn Lee Mitchell & Michael Munn)

Rock Bottom (Geoff Baker)

Once There Was a Way: What if the Beatles Stayed Together? (Bryce Zabel)

Like Some Forgotten Dream: What if the Beatles Hadn't Split Up? (Daniel Rachel)

Dylan, Lennon, Marx and God (Jon Stewart)

Paul is Undead: The British Zombie Invasion (Alan Goldsher)

★★☆☆☆

Paperback Writer (Mark Shipper)

[idontwanttospoiltheparty]

whats your take on john and stu?

Outside Pauline Sutcliffe's allegations, I have never seen any huge indication that Stu was attracted to men, but so little is known about him there's no real way to know either way. I think Pauline even insists Stu wasn't actually into it. Really, I don't feel strongly about it either way. Pauline's been inconsistent and has also somewhat tried to defame John by alleging he caused Stu's death, and her framing of John and Stu's alleged sexual relationship to my understanding really makes John out to be an abuser. That doesn't mean it definitely didn't happen, to be clear, but it does kind of make the whole story questionable. I think Astrid and Klaus also disputed the claim.

From John's side, I do think it's interesting that he drew parallels between Yoko and Stu, in a similar way he did with Paul:

'The only thing ever lacking in working with another artist and they were usually male - whether it was Stuart Sutcliffe (my art school friend) or Paul McCartney (my musical friend) - is that the relationship only goes as far as the front door and after that you are alone in bed. It's a plus not a minus. The plus is that your best friend can also hold you.' – John, in an interview with Sandra Shevey (1972) Source: The Other Side of Lennon by Sandra Shevey (1990), p. 10

Also here, where Yoko noticed this:

'I [Yoko] said to [John] later, “When you wrote me all those letters, weren’t you worried I’d run to a newspaper or something? You’re a married man.” He said, “I used to write long letters like that to Stu Sutcliffe.” “Oh,” I thought, “I'm a replacement for Stu…He was a guy and I'm a woman…” I thought that was a little bit strange.' – Yoko to Philip Norman Source: John Lennon: The Life by Philip Norman (2008), p. 532 ((got this quote from @phoneybeatlemania's old blog, love youuuuuuuu))

I don't take this as a confirmation that John was attracted to Stu, but it certainly is a possibility. The first passage would indicate it wasn't reciprocated, or not to the extent John would have wanted. I've also toyed with the idea that getting together with Yoko made John reassess his previous relationships and he may have retroactively "decided" he'd been in love with Stu without that necessarily having been the case at the time (this could even conceivably have happened with Paul).

All in all: I don't know! I do tend to think of Stu as probably at least a crush John harboured at some point though. As for Stu, I don't think I know enough to say for certain, but it kinda seems like John didn't think it was requited.

[anotherkindofmindpod]

Thanks ladies for another fascinating podcast.

I was especially surprised to hear Pauline Sutcliffe, in relation to the fight between John and Stu, mention that Paul and George had been complaining about Stu's base playing. With the "using his fists" and this, it does appear Paul was not the only one that had issues with Stu being in the band.

It does make me wonder, two Beatles fighting but only Stu's point of view is described. To me, you would think that both view points should be told so that the reader can understand both boys. This is a BEATLES biography is it not? How can you not try to explain the motivations of one of the Beatles. Surely Paul fans are going to make up 25% of your readership??!

At least now I understand why Lewisohn chose to do a Beatles biography rather than a Lennon biography, it's so he can pick Paul to pieces.

Nothing to add to this excellent ask!

thanks for writing and listening, Anon.

[ceofjohnlennon]

John Lennon... How can I explain John Lennon?

[eppysboys]

hi!! extremely important question: is it known what colour were stu's eyes? 👉👈

Hi!

It's only an educated guess: His sister had very blue eyes herself, and in this video of his mother, you can sort of see that her eyes are probably light-coloured.

[kaiserkeller]

what do you mean about the love me tender recording?

In 2011, the Stuart Sutcliffe Estate, then run by his younger sister, Pauline, announced that, in 2009, they had received a copy from an anonymous sender of Stuart singing ‘Love Me Tender’. They said they had known of its existence since the 1990s but had never known who possessed a copy. Pauline was headstrong about the recording genuinely being of Stuart, and it still exists on Spotify under his name with 310,000 streams. She even enlisted the help of ‘Beatles historians’ to confirm its ‘authenticity’. But it’s not true. Not in the slightest. The recording is actually by The Boston Show Band, an Irish(?) group from the 60s that spent time in the clubs of Hamburg and London, but never actually had any hits. Because of their obscurity, the Estate was, and still is, able to pass it off as being a ‘lost’ early Beatles recording without much criticism. But The Boston Show Band do now have a Spotify profile and you can listen to the track under their name without giving any royalties to the Estate.

[urtrickster]

characters that make me go feral.

making this my pinned post because people need to know what they're getting into. these r all from the top of my head and more will certainly b added in the future.

bold = super feral i am nowhere near normal about them and if you bring them up i will need to be physically restrained.

Abby Anderson - The Last of Us.

Ada Wong - Resident Evil.

Aerith Gainsborough - Final Fantasy.

Aizetsu - Demon Slayer.

Akaza - Demon Slayer.

Alex Kralie - Marble Hornets.

Astarion - Baldur's Gate 3.

Benimaru - Tensura.

Bo Sinclair - House of Wax.

Brahms Heelshire - The Boy.

Brian Thomas - Marble Hornets.

Cobra Bubbles - Lilo and Stitch.

Dan Heng - Honkai Star Rail.

Dark Link - The Legend of Zelda.

Diablo - Tensura.

Dimitri Alexandre Blaiddyd - Fire Emblem.

Douma - Demon Slayer.

Ed Warren - The Conjuring Universe.

Enmu - Demon Slayer.

Fi - The Legend of Zelda.

Furina - Genshin Impact.

Ganondorf - The Legend of Zelda.

Ghirahim - The Legend of Zelda.

Gojo Satoru - Jujustu Kaisen.

Grelle Sutcliff - Black Butler.

Hobie Brown - Across the Spider-Verse.

Homicidal Liu - Creepypasta.

Howl Jenkins Pendragon - Howl's Moving Castle.

Julia - Man of Medan.

Josh Washington - Until Dawn.

Kadaj - Advent Children.

Karaku - Demon Slayer.

Kokushibo - Demon Slayer.

Kibutsuji Muzan - Demon Slayer.

Lester Sinclair - House of Wax.

Lorraine Warren - The Conjuring Universe.

Lumine - Genshin Impact.

Mark Nestor - The Devil in Me.

Nick Furcillo - The Quarry.

Pauline - Mario.

Raiden Ei - Genshin Impact.

Rengoku Kyojuro - Demon Slayer.

Reno - Final Fantasy.

Ryomen Sukuna (but he's in timeout right now) - Jujustu Kaisen.

Sampo Koski - Honkai Star Rail.

Sebastian Michaelis - Black Butler.

Sekido - Demon Slayer.

Stu Macher - Scream.

Sephiroth - Final Fantasy.

Tartaglia - Genshin Impact.

The Curator - The Dark Pictures Anthology.

Urogi - Demon Salyer.

Veldora Tempest - Tensura.

Vincent Sinclair - House of Wax.

Vincent Valentine - Final Fantasy.

Venti - Genshin Impact.

Volo - Pokémon Legends: Arceus.

Wally Darling - Welcome Home.

Wanderer - Genshin Impact.

Xiao - Genshin Impact.

Zack Fair - Final Fantasy.

Zhongli - Genshin Impact.

Zohakuten - Demon Slayer.

[undying-love]

"Was John gay? A question mark has been set against his sexuality. As noted, Pauline Sutcliffe has suggested John had a love affair of sorts with her brother, Stuart; while John's school friend Pete Shotton has affirmed that John told him he'd had sexual contact with Brian Epstein in Spain. Shotton says John told him Brian had made a pass at him on holiday. John's response being to drop his trousers and invite his manager to 'stick it up me fucking arse then'. Brian said this wasn't quite what he had in mind, so John masturbated him. This is only relevant in as much as what stock Paul McCartney puts in such stories about his best friend and, on balance, he rejects suggestions John was homosexual, not least because he and John spent countless nights together in hotels on the road, 'and there was never any hint that he was gay. Certainly the suggestion has never been made about McCartney himself."

Fab : An Intimate Life of Paul McCartney, by Howard Sounes