Paul McCartney: The Biography by Philip Norman – review

Philip Norman’s considered biography portrays the ‘cute’ Beatle in all his creative complexity and breadth

“Never write the authorised biography,” goes one media adage; you are likely to find the most savoury sections of your tale excised. Philip Norman’s fulsome life of Paul McCartney, a companion to his biography of John Lennon, comes with “tacit approval”, meaning there was no interference from McCartney, but no cooperation either, Norman’s 1981 Beatles history, Shout!, being deemed “anti-Paul” (“John Lennon was three quarters of the Beatles” – that’ll do it).

McCartney has long nursed a clutch of grievances about the established mythology of the Beatles, foremost that& he is invariably portrayed as the “safe”, soft-centred obverse to John Lennon’s acerbic, iconoclastic rocker; doe-eyed, “cute” Beatle Paul, handy with a melody and a bassline but lacking the fire and edginess of “clever”& Beatle John. This view was vigorously promoted by Lennon himself in the wake of the group’s bust-up (and later upheld by Yoko Ono), brandishing Tomorrow Never Knows and A Day in the Life against “granny music” like When I’m Sixty-Four and Your Mother Should Know.

In the judgment of producer George Martin, 'John was lemon to Paul’s olive oil.' The Beatles’ magic required them both

Related: Paul McCartney strikes out to gain control of his share of the Beatles catalogue

Paul’s fondness for the demon weed provides a chaotic subplot in the story. Tokyo aside, there were several busts