{"id":9299,"date":"2024-02-27T16:22:22","date_gmt":"2024-02-27T21:22:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.thefest.com\/?p=9299"},"modified":"2024-02-27T16:22:22","modified_gmt":"2024-02-27T21:22:22","slug":"revolver-deep-dive-part-9-and-your-bird-can-sing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thefest.com\/revolver-deep-dive-part-9-and-your-bird-can-sing\/","title":{"rendered":"Revolver Deep Dive Part 9: And Your Bird Can Sing"},"content":{"rendered":"

Side Two, Track Two<\/strong><\/p>\n

In Which \u201cYou Don\u2019t Get Me\u201d becomes \u201cAnd Your Bird Can Sing\u201d<\/p>\n

by Jude Southerland Kessler and Erin Torkleson Weber<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

This month, our Fest Blog continues our in-depth study of <\/em>Revolver with a song that has \u201cmore than meets the eye.\u201d It\u2019s John Lennon\u2019s enigmatic \u201cAnd Your Bird Can Sing,\u201d a track full of vitriolic lyrics, incredible musicianship, and controversy about \u201cwho did what.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Joining Jude Southerland Kessler<\/strong>, author of The John Lennon Series<\/strong> this month to explore this song is the highly respected author Erin Torkelson Weber<\/strong>. <\/em>\u00a0A graduate of Newman University and Wichita State, after completing her graduate degree, Erin Weber began teaching American History part time at Newman University. Looking for a new, more modern subject to appeal to students in her senior seminar and research classes, Erin, a Beatles fan since childhood, began researching the band’s historiography. In 2016 McFarland published her work\u00a0<\/em>The Beatles and the Historians: An Analysis of Writings About the Fab Four<\/strong>, which examines the historical methodology and historiographical arc of the Beatles story. In addition, Erin helps run a blog, \u201cThe Historian and the Beatles,\u201d which provides book reviews and source analysis of various Beatles works: she also co-hosts \u201cAll Together Now,\u201d a podcast with Karen Hooper, and has guest starred on numerous other podcasts.\u00a0Erin is a beloved member of our Fest Family, and we welcome her to the blog!<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

What\u2019s Standard:<\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Date Recorded: 20 April 1966\u00a0 <\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Time recorded:<\/em><\/strong> 2.30 p.m. \u2013 2.30 a.m. (Note: Lewisohn points out that also recorded on this long day in studio were 4 rhythm track takes of \u201cTaxman.\u201d)<\/em><\/p>\n

Technical Team:<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Producer:<\/em><\/strong> George Martin<\/em><\/p>\n

Sound Engineer:<\/em><\/strong> Geoff Emerick<\/em><\/p>\n

Second Engineer:<\/em><\/strong> Phil MacDonald (Lewisohn, <\/em>The Beatles Recording Sessions, 75)<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

On this day:<\/em><\/strong> A backing track was created with Ringo on his 1964 Ludwig Oyster Black Pearl \u201cSuper Classic\u201d drum set and George on his 1965 Rickenbacker 360 12-string electric. There is a second guitarist, and the identity of that person has been questioned and debated through the years. In <\/em>The Beatles Recording Reference Manual, Vol. 2, Hammack states that it was \u201ceither Lennon on his 1961 Fender Stratocaster with synchronized tremolo or McCartney on his Epiphone ES-230TD, Casino electric guitar with Selmer Bigsby B7 vibrato.\u201d (p. 125) Hammack notes that when George Harrison was quizzed about who performed on the second guitar by <\/em>Guitar Player magazine in 1987, Harrison admitted that he didn\u2019t know the answer. Hammack says that he feels \u201cLennon\u2019s aggressive count-in indicates him as the guitarist,\u201d but there is no conclusive proof. On this same track, John and Paul also sang on the backing vocals. (Hammack, 125)<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Two takes were performed. Take Two was deemed \u201cbest.\u201d <\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Then, superimpositions followed:<\/em><\/p>\n

McCartney performed on his 1964 Rickenbacker 4001S bass<\/em><\/p>\n

Harrison performed a guitar solo on one of 3 guitars he had in studio<\/em><\/p>\n

Starr performed on tambourine<\/em><\/p>\n

Paul and John double-tracked the backing vocals. The harmonies in the backing vocals are quite intricate and of note. This often-overlooked song has many layers. <\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Date Reworked: 26 April 1966 <\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Location for both sessions: <\/em><\/strong>EMI, Studio Two<\/em><\/p>\n

Time recorded:<\/em><\/strong> 2.30 p.m. \u2013 2.45 a.m. <\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Technical Team:<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Producer: <\/em><\/strong>George Martin<\/em><\/p>\n

Sound Engineer:<\/em><\/strong> Geoff Emerick<\/em><\/p>\n

Second Engineer:<\/em><\/strong> Phil McDonald (Lewisohn, <\/em>The Beatles Recording Sessions, 76)<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

On this day:<\/em><\/strong> The Beatles decide to completely remake<\/u> \u201cAnd Your Bird Can Sing.\u201d In 11 takes, (which are numbered 3-13) The Beatles create a completely new backing track. Hammack tells us that \u201cLennon [is] either on his Fender Stratocaster or his Epiphone ES-230TD, Casino electric guitar, Harrison [is] again on [his] Rickenbacker 360-12 electric guitar, McCartney [is] on his Rickenbacker 4001S bass, and Starr is on his Ludwig drums. (Hammack, 126)<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Takes 6 and 10 were selected as \u201cbest.\u201d Superimpositions included:<\/em><\/p>\n

Ringo on tambourine<\/em><\/p>\n

Ringo on high-hat and cymbals<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Eventually, Take 10 would be chosen as \u201cbest,\u201d but Paul\u2019s bass work on Take 6 would still be dubbed as the best. So, these elements were blended.<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Once again, the harmony lead guitar work is questioned. There is no doubt that Harrison performed. But no one knows for sure if Lennon or McCartney accompanied him.<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

As the last order of business, Hammack tells us, \u201cFinally, John added his lead vocals with McCartney and Harrison on backing vocals and hand claps (all recorded with frequency control (varispeed) at slower than normal tape speed, on playback sounding around half a semitone higher in pitch.)\u201d (<\/em>The Beatles Recording Reference Manual, Vol. 2, p. 127)<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

***See Jerry Hammack\u2019s <\/em>The Beatles Recording Reference Manual, Vol. 2, 125-128 for more information.<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Other Valuable Sources:<\/em><\/strong> Lewisohn, <\/em>The Beatles Recording Sessions, 75 and 77 , Lewisohn, <\/em>The Complete Beatles Chronicle, 218 and 219, Winn, <\/em>That Magic Feeling, 12-13 and 14-15,Lennon, Cynthia, <\/em>A Twist of Lennon, 128, Rodriguez, <\/em>Revolver: How The Beatles Reimagined Rock\u2019n\u2019Roll, 89 and 123-126, Robertson, The Art and Music of John Lennon, 54-55, Gould, 360, Spizer, <\/em>The Beatles for Sale on Parlophone Records, 215, Spizer,<\/em> The Beatles Rubber Soul to Revolver, 219, Turner, <\/em>Beatles \u201966, 159-161, Turner, <\/em>A Hard Day\u2019s Write, 111-112, <\/em>\u00a0Margotin and Guesdon, 340-341, Davies, <\/em>The Beatles Lyrics, 169-171, Spignesi and Lewis, 79-80, Riley,<\/em> Tell Me Why, 192-193, MacDonald, <\/em>Revolution in the Head, 159, Womack, <\/em>Long and Winding Roads (2007 edition), 143-144, Womack, The Beatles Encyclopedia, 36-37, Hammack, <\/em>The Beatles Recording Reference Manual, Vol. 2, 125-128, and Mellers, <\/em>Twilight of the Gods, 76.<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

A Fresh New Look: <\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Jude Southerland Kessler:<\/em><\/strong> Erin, the recording of \u201cAnd Your Bird Can Sing\u201d took two long days of studio work \u2013 13 takes! Yet, in <\/em>The Beatles Anthology, John Lennon categorizes \u201cAnd Your Bird Can Sing\u201d as \u201cone of my throwaways.\u201d This is a typical Lennon \u201ctell,\u201d a phrase he consistently uses to characterize songs that reveal too much emotion, leaving him vulnerable. John applies the epithet to 1965\u2019s \u201cIt\u2019s Only Love,\u201d which explores the deepening rift in his relationship with Cynthia. He applies it to \u201cRun for Your Life,\u201d a song that lays bare his jealously and feelings of inadequacy. (He told David Sheff that only after his Primal Scream therapy was he able to write a song openly about these feelings: \u201cJealous Guy.\u201d) Is it possible that John is rebuffing other deep-seated emotions in this song as well?<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Erin Torkleson Weber:<\/strong> A \u201cthrowaway\u201d song would presumably come across as (by Beatles standards, anyway) formulaic and relatively unremarkable, and \u201cAnd Your Bird Can Sing\u201d is neither. John\u2019s ex post facto<\/em> dismissal of its significance (he criticized it several times after the band\u2019s breakup, both in 1971 and 1980) doesn\u2019t erode the song\u2019s lyrical bite and sharp edges, which appear to offer a glimpse into John wanting, for lack of a better term, \u201ctop billing\u201d from someone with whom he\u2019s connected, and whose preoccupation with tangential things is apparently mucking up their connection with and understanding of the singer, John. Given what we know of John\u2019s deep-seated, lifelong fear of abandonment, this reading of the song would make it the furthest thing from a throwaway; rather, it can be seen as an expression of insecurity and frustration at an important someone\u2019s not prioritizing him and letting him down by not \u201cgetting\u201d him. One of the authors to underscore this song\u2019s possible emotional significance is Tim Riley, who notes \u201cthe implied rejection\u201d (Riley, Tell Me Why<\/em>, 192) evidenced by the snag in Lennon\u2019s vocalization of \u201cme.\u201d<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

However, Riley appears to be one of the authorial exceptions. In his excellent work, Can\u2019t Buy Me Love: The Beatles, Britain and America<\/em>, Jonathan Gould describes \u201cAnd Your Bird Can Sing\u201d as \u201cdirected at an anonymous adversary,\u201d (Gould, 359), and that adversarial component is what has drawn the most focus and encouraged significant speculation over the decades, by numerous authors, over whom John is addressing. Theories have ranged from Mick Jagger to Frank Sinatra, usually arguing that the song was provoked by Lennon\u2019s \u201cprofessional jealousy\u201d (Gould, 360) and\/or his dismissal of individuals whose pretension blinded them to true enlightenment. (Turner, Beatles\u2019 66: The Revolutionary Year,<\/em> 160).<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Yet these interpretations tend to ignore that, at the same time it criticizes, \u201cAnd Your Bird Can Sing\u201d also attempts to offer its subject some reassurance. \u201cI\u2019ll be round,\u201d is, after all, wrapped inside the warning \u201cyou don\u2019t get me;\u201d a very appropriate lyrical pivot for the emotionally mercurial Lennon. This appears to indicate that, once the subject has tired of their pretentious distractions, Lennon and the song\u2019s subject can possibly \u201csee\u201d one another and connect.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

This reading of the song would certainly seem to eliminate Gould\u2019s speculation that it was directed at Sinatra, to whom John would hardly be inclined to want to \u201csee\u201d or \u201cget\u201d him.\u00a0 And Faithfull\u2019s speculation that the song was directed at Jagger (identifying her,\u00a0 Marianne, as the \u201cbird\u201d in the song) is purely that, speculation. (Rodriguez, Revolver: How the Beatles Reimagined Rock\u2019n\u2019Roll<\/em>, 89). This overall reading of the song inevitably leads us to the question: Whom did Lennon feel, during this point in the Revolver<\/em> sessions, wasn\u2019t understanding him or prioritizing him the way he needed? That\u2019s a level of lyrical analysis that\u2019s above my historian\u2019s paygrade, but a fascinating question to ask, particularly given John\u2019s latter strong dismissal of the song.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Kessler:<\/strong> Erin, as a follow-up question\u2026 In the wake of his successful volumes, <\/em>In His Own Write and <\/em>A Spaniard in the Works, John had contracted with Jonathan Cape Publishers to write a third book to be released in February 1966. And writing was important to John. Indeed, when asked by Kenneth Allsop which profession he would prefer if he could choose between writing songs or writing books, John immediately chose writing books. He told Allsop he\u2019d been doing that long before he became a Beatle. However, by the end of 1965, John admitted that he had only one poem prepared for the upcoming book, and so, he abandoned the idea of publishing again. Of course, John\u2019s unrelenting schedule in 1965 must have had a great deal to do with that decision. But, do you think it\u2019s possible that songs such as \u201cAnd Your Bird Can Sing\u201d gradually supplanted John\u2019s need to write emotional, soul-revealing poetry and prose?<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Weber:<\/strong> This is an excellent question, because it offers a chance to delve into issues regarding John\u2019s creative process, and how that process was impacted by external and internal factors. What\u2019s interesting about John\u2019s schedule in 1965 is that you can make the argument his earlier schedules from the years when he wrote In His Own Write<\/em>, published in 1964, and A Spaniard in the Works<\/em>, which was published in June of 1965, were equally frantic. Why would this demanding schedule only begin to slow down his literary productivity by the end of 1965, when it hadn\u2019t seriously impacted it before? Having said that, you can certainly argue that it was the cumulative effect of what had been, at that point, approximately three years of an unrelenting schedule, frantic pace, and constant demands of new songwriting material that played a role in preventing John from producing his third book.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

We can speculate on any number of reasons, in addition to his frantic schedule, as to why John ultimately didn\u2019t produce his third book. John told Allsop that he preferred writing books to writing songs, but the reality is that contractual and studio demands unquestioningly and unrelentingly prioritized song writing. So did the band\u2019s group ethos and his competitive partnership with Paul.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Additionally, the argument that John\u2019s realization that he could use song lyrics, such as those in \u201cAnd Your Bird Can Sing,\u201d to express the emotions previously and primarily expressed in his poems, letters and cartoons is a convincing one. In The Art and Music of John Lennon<\/em>, John Robertson notes how Lennon\u2019s \u201cprose and verse writing had once been a form of exorcism,\u201d (Robertson, 50) but argues that the lyrical example of Bob Dylan, coupled with the sonic possibilities in the studio, essentially allowed John to exorcise these elements through songwriting in a way that he had never previously considered or been able to accomplish.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Finally, we have to note that this use of self-revealing lyrics, replacing the old outlets of poetry and prose, corresponded with John\u2019s initial exposure to and use of LSD. Robertson discusses how Lennon\u2019s LSD use seriously influenced his writing and also argues that, in contrast to \u201cthe more fixed medium of prose,\u201d songwriting allowed Lennon to express \u201cthese vague, shifting feelings\u201d created by the aforementioned LSD use. (Robertson, 50)<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Kessler:<\/em><\/strong> To conclude,<\/em> what\u2019s your reaction to this song, Erin? Does it speak to you in any way? Musically? Lyrically? Emotionally?<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Weber:<\/strong> For me, \u201cAnd Your bird Can Sing\u201d is an excellent case study of how our connections and reactions to songs can shift with time and experience. As a bookish, four-eyed, awkward pre-teen with only a few (but amazing, essential, now lifelong) friends, every time I heard \u201cAnd Your Bird Can Sing\u201d on my dad\u2019s Beatles tapes, I heard it as an indictment of the \u201ccool\u201d crowd in my middle school: fellow preteens so obsessed with wearing the right pair of brand-name sneakers that anyone, no matter how smart or funny or warm or generous, who didn\u2019t meet their superficial standards was shunned or teased: \u201cYou say you\u2019ve seen the seven wonders…but you don\u2019t see me.\u201d It went both ways, too: in my mind, if you were the sort of individual who cared so much about such trivial, adolescent status symbols that you couldn\u2019t bother to look beneath the surface in order to know the person underneath, I didn\u2019t want to waste my time attempting to get to know you, either.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Decades later, and (thankfully) well removed from middle school, I have a deep appreciation for the song\u2019s lack of sentimentality. \u201cAnd Your Bird Can Sing\u201d is a song about attempting, and failing, to connect with someone. This is a feeling to which almost everyone can relate. Yet there\u2019s no self-pity in it, and no sentimentality. I\u2019m not a musician, or a musicologist, but my interpretation is that every other musical aspect of the song \u2013 the strident guitars, the edge in John\u2019s voice \u2013 serves the song well. Its blend of warning over how prioritizing the wrong things \u2013 \u201cprized possessions\u201d \u2013 has damaged a point of connection between two people, combined with the singer\u2019s frustration at feeling unseen and unheard, makes it relatable. Connections between people can and do fray, and while they can be patched, this song lays bare how it feels when that distance starts to occur.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

What\u2019s Changed:<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

Generally, this segment of the Fest blog precedes the \u201cFresh, New Look\u201d<\/strong> interview. However, Erin Weber\u2019s responses were so integral to the information in the following section that for this month, we\u2019ve shifted things around. The aspect of \u201cAnd Your Bird Can Sing\u201d that has changed most over the years is the presumed identity of the protagonist, the \u201cyou\u201d in this song. There have been many theories and suggestions proffered. Based on 37 years of study of John\u2019s life and personality, I\u2019m postulating yet another theory. Fifty-nine years after the song\u2019s composition, however, no one can conclusively prove John\u2019s intent. \u00a0– Jude<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

As historian Erin Torkleson Weber so adeptly pointed out, Beatles experts and biographers have, over the years, offered myriad suggestions about the identity of the person to whom this song addressed. Others have claimed that they<\/em> were the subjects of the song, although they can\u2019t explain why Lennon was so annoyed with them. Marianne Faithfull, for example \u2013 as Erin indicates \u2013 swore the song was about her, claiming John\u2019s jealousy toward Mick Jagger and herself. But Faithfull\u2019s claim falls flat when we discover that 1) John genuinely liked Mick Jagger and 2) John wrote this song before<\/em> Marianne and Mick were even \u201can item.\u201d<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Cynthia Lennon, who once gave John the gift of a wind-up songbird, thought the song was directed at her and said so in her first book, A Twist of Lennon<\/em> (p. 128). But when we closely examine the lyrics, Cynthia meets none of the criteria<\/em> to be the song\u2019s protagonist. Cynthia had only traveled a limited number of times and all of those excursions were taken with her husband: to Ireland, Paris, Tahiti, and America for The Beatles\u2019 Feb. 1964 visit. (Her visit to India was yet to transpire.) Cynthia had never visited exotic locations or seen \u201cSeven Wonders.\u201d Additionally, she knew very little about sound and music, and most crucially, she certainly didn\u2019t have everything she wanted. John\u2019s lyrics simply don\u2019t fit Cynthia\u2019s profile.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Lately, a YouTube video from James Hargreaves (which is well-presented) offers up Frank Sinatra as the song\u2019s possible protagonist because Sinatra edged out The Beatles for The Grammy\u2019s \u201cAlbum of the Year\u201d award in 1965 with the LP, September of My Life<\/em> \u2013 and because Sinatra intensely disliked The Beatles and said so<\/a>.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

However, John and Paul had never \u201cgiven a whit\u201d for gold records, titles, or honors. By the summer of 1965, John had quit attending the Ivor Novello Awards. All of The Beatles complained about appearing at innumerable gold record ceremonies. In fact, in August of 1965, when compelled to attend the celebratory cocktail party given for them by Capitol Records president, Alan Livingston, George flatly refused to attend; Paul left early, and John departed not long after Paul. Such laudatory proceedings had become tedious.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

All The Beatles really wanted to do was make great music. And as they returned to EMI in October of 1965 to create what would become Rubber Soul<\/em>, they were inspired (and not threatened) by American competitors such as The Lovin\u2019 Spoonful and the Byrds. In fact, the more talented their competitors<\/em> (The Stones, the Byrds, the Beach Boys), the more The Beatles respected and liked them!<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Frank Sinatra hardly registered on The Beatles\u2019 radar. If the performer didn\u2019t appreciate their hair or their style or even their personalities\u2026well, who cared? Yet the tone of \u201cAnd Your Bird Can Sing\u201d is anything but milquetoast. It is angry. Very angry. John Lennon is singing to someone who really matters to him. Indeed, it appears that John is speaking directly to someone he knows \u2013 someone close to him whom he feels has betrayed his trust. We know this is the case because, as Erin pointed out, John vows in the bridge that no matter how cruel the person is to him,<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\u201cLook in my direction,<\/em><\/p>\n

I\u2019ll be \u2019round; I\u2019ll be \u2019round.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

In other words, John has no intention of turning his back on the offender. Despite perceived disloyalty demonstrated by his former friend, John promises that he will always be there.<\/p>\n

So, who is the protagonist of this song? John supplies numerous (though cryptic) clues to the betrayer\u2019s identity:<\/p>\n