Fans Say Beatles Biographer Philip Norman’s Obituary for George Harrison Is ‘Obnoxious’ ‘Drivel’
Fans say Beatles Biographer Philip Norman’s obituary for George Harrison is “obnoxious” and “drivel.” George wasn’t a fan of Norman either. The former Beatle had strong opinions about what Norman wrote in his 1981 book, Shout!: The True Story of The Beatles.
The author’s work in ‘Shout!’ angered the former Beatle
George said most authors wrote books about The Beatles out of malice. He would’ve added Norman to that group.
In 1988, he told Q Magazine (per Harrison Stories) that Norman wrote Shout! because he was “desperate to have an identity.”
Q said, “Philip Norman suggests that you learned the sitar because you were desperate to have some identity within The Beatles.”
George replied, “That Philip Norman wrote that book because he was desperate to have an identity is probably closer to the truth. All these people who think they know everything…they don’t know anything. What it makes me realise is that there’s so much that they’ve written about The Beatles that is wrong.
“I mean, if they’re wrong about us, now. We haven’t even died yet. History must be totally twisted.”
Q added, “Paul appears to still care enormously that the record is set straight, that he feels he didn’t get the credit he deserved.”
“Well if he doesn’t think he got the credit he deserved, what about me and Ringo?… There was my guitar sound, Ringo’s drum fills…all that was part of the Beatles’ sound.”
Philip Norman’s obituary for George Harrison
If George disliked Norman’s Shout!, he would’ve despised his obituary. Norman’s obituary for George has some strong opinions.
“Harrison was never the world’s greatest guitarist, vocalist or songwriter,” Norman wrote. “But he was as essential to the Fab Four formula as John Lennon’s rebellious smile or Paul McCartney’s great cow eyes. He was ‘the quiet one,’ the serious musician who held the beat together while John and Paul were skylarking at the mike. Beatles fans who screamed for George were a curious but dedicated minority, like those who pick the green ones in packets of wine gums.”
Norman met The Beatles at a concert in 1965. The others were immediately friendly. George, in the background, looked like “a bit of a miserable git, but I did not dream how right I was.”
George was a bitter, shy, self-conscious, and undemonstrative person who was sick of being side-lined by John and Paul. His interest in Indian spirituality was an obsession. “Here Comes the Sun” was “an elegy containing all the blissed-out, sun-soaked false optimism of 1969 — could have been written by either John or Paul.”
Calling George a “great humanitarian” for his work on the Concert for Bangladesh was “putting it rather strong.” Without Paul and John to “stimulate and frustrate him” George never produced the quality work shown in All Things Must Pass again.
George alienated audiences “by his self-importance and heavy-handed attempts at lecturing and preaching.” Norman called George’s supergroup, The Traveling Wilburys, “laid back country-rock.”
He lacked the “Midas touch” of Paul. Norman even tactlessly brought up George’s alleged affairs and sexual exploits. After George’s death, the author also claimed it had “produced some extraordinarily overblown tributes.”
“Harrison was no giant,” he wrote. “But he was the indispensable limb of a giant — the most powerful engine for creating human happiness that the entertainment world has ever seen. He was a Beatle, one of only four who were ever made or will be made. The pity is that it was never quite enough for him.”
Fans hated (and still do) Norman’s obituary for George
Norman’s obituary for George does tell the story of his life. However, he added insensitive and biting remarks that he should have left out of an obituary. There was so much harsh criticism.
Fans hated it and still do. Someone who posted the obituary wrote, “Sometimes I have to remind myself why I dislike this man so intensely. You probably don’t want to read this drivel.”
One Reddit page calls it “obnoxious.” A fan commented, “Wow, I’ve never seen someone miss the entire point of an obituary so badly. It’s like he took every potentially bad thing George ever did and mixed it with his opinion and stories from small interactions with George.
“Honestly, I feel like I learned more about the kind of person Norman is than I did about George. This article (I hardly even want to call it an obituary) reeks of self-importance and a sort of moral superiority complex…
“I’m willing to accept that George did some not-so great stuff, but do you really have to go there in an obituary?”
Others have taken to the internet to share their thoughts on Norman’s obituary for George. However, they all agree that Norman wrote it in bad taste. The obituary reads like an overly critical album review, something George didn’t waste his time reading.
