Erin and I are happy to announce that we’re taking our blog to the airwaves!

In this podcast, Erin and I will delve into the band’s historiography— the study of how their story has been told over time — by reviewing beatle biography in the context of its data sources, the objectives and biases of the individuals who have constructed its narratives, and the varying versions of Beatle history contained within its pages. It’s a podcast for Beatles lovers, readers, and history lovers alike. 

Stay tuned!

18 thoughts on “Introducing:

  1. Robert says:

    Fantastic idea – I’m excited to start “tuning in” (can’t remember the last time I actually tuned anything in 😁.
    No pressure, but I’m sure it’ll be fab!


  2. Erin says:

    We’re hoping that the podcast discussions will take the place of the book analyses I haven’t had the time to do, often enough, over the past few years. It takes a few hours to write a thorough book analysis; my time is at a premium and my uninterrupted time is non-existent. But we’re going to try and keep the podcast discussions to less than an hour, and routinely schedule a time that’s easier to fit in my schedule. I’m really looking forward to launching this with Karen in a few weeks.


  3. Tom Krovatin says:

    Great news! I definitely will be tuning in, and adding this podcast to my favorites. Please keep us posted. Best of success!


    • Erin says:

      I haven’t read that one, Sam. I will have to add it to my ever-growing reading list, which I plan on tackling when my hiatus is done. Reading a Beatles book is an investment of time, on my part: I’m a fairly quick reader, and usually get through 2-3 books a week, on average, when I’m not reading academically.

      But when I’m reading academically, my rate drops to one to two books per week, because I’ll analyze as I read, mentally noting when there’s an interesting quote or piece of evidence or an issue with methods analysis, and placing a bookmark (usually just a torn scrap of paper) on that page. Then, when I’m finished with the book, I’ll go through the book again, noting where I placed the bookmark, re-read the page(s) to see if I remember what information sparked my interest, and write it, longhand, in my notes. (I write notes on every book I read, academically). So I read the same pages twice, then copy them down by hand, which does an excellent job of incidentally committing the material to memory, even if that’s not my main intent.

      It’s fairly time consuming, particularly the writing by hand part: studies have proven that writing by longhand commits material better to memory than typing it up, but depending on the book, it can take hours to write everything out. I took “You Never Give Me You Money” on a road trip once, three hours there and three hours back, and spent almost the entire time (my husband drove) copying down quotes. What I found hilarious is that my husband never once asked me what I was doing. (I didn’t tell him I was writing a book until I had a publisher lined up). When I asked him why not, some time later, he just shrugged and said: “I figured it was something for work.” So that’s my very detailed way of explaining that, once I do get back to immersing myself in new Beatles book and Beatles historiography, that’s the approach I’ll use. I can’t read as a casual fan, unfortunately.


      • Hologram Sam says:

        In the youtube video the author created to advertise the Hamburg book (it’s in the link above) I was amused to see he used the “Deep Nostalgia” AI program to animate and colorize familiar old photos of John, Paul, George, Pete, and Stu from that era. They smile and blink their eyes. It’s uncanny.

        And yes, there’s a big difference between reading as a casual fan and reading as a researcher. I often envy the casual fan!


        • Erin says:

          It’s been so long since I read any non-fiction casually that I almost can’t remember how it felt to do it. I remember writing a research paper my freshman year of college that was, I now see, methodologically poor to terrible: few primary sources; way too much dependence on one major secondary source (I should have diversified my sources); blindly taking everything any source said as gospel because — duh! — it was in a book, which came from our university library, which automatically made it authoritative, etc. Looking at it now, I was simply regurgitating information without analyzing it, so I had a base level of understanding of facts and dates and consequences of events, but lacked the deeper level of understanding that comes with legitimate analysis.


  4. Joe Wisbey says:

    A podcast?! Who’d start a podcast!? 😜 Good luck to you both with it – and feel free to get in touch if you need any help/hints! Or of course – if you want to add a guest to your show


    • Erin says:

      Love the nod, Joe. And once we’re established, I’d love to have you on to talk shop.

      We are piggybacking off of your idea, although, as I said, we’re going to try and provide the podcast version of the book reviews I was writing before hours of uninterrupted time became difficult to impossible for me to find in my schedule. Ours are going to be more analysis than the book reviews you do so well on your podcast — which may seem like splitting hairs, but it’s really not. Reviews are essential; analysis is essential in a different (albeit, I’ll admit it, somewhat boring) way.

      We’ll actually delve into that in the first podcast episode: the difference between reviews/summary/analysis, then we plan to explain how we’re trying to provide the same experience/analysis as you would have if you were attending a graduate school level reading seminar on the Beatles. Ahh, the magic of reading seminars. (Which, all I can say is, you better pray you find the overall subject of the reading seminar interesting, or you are in for a semester long slog. Unfortunately, I speak from experience). Then, after half our audience has fallen asleep/turned it off because it’s too much like a college lecture, we’ll delve into everyone’s favorite clickbait podcast subject: historical methods categorization! Categories and subcategories! (Did I mention I am rotten at salesmanship?)


  5. Joe Wisbey says:

    I think yours and my podcasts are entirely separate beasts. As you know my are almost always author interviews – rather than too much analysis- I’m always intrigued as to why these people decide to write in the first place and interviews are always the best way to find that out.
    Good luck again and don’t hesitate to ask if you need any help – although it’s the UK school holidays now there are two extra small people running around for me to deal with so it may take a little longer to get back to you!

    If anyone reading this isn’t aware of my podcast/ you can check it out at


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s