fifth Beatle nominees...

Some 'fifths'....

Pete Best
Stu Sutcliffe
George Martin
Brian Epstein
Billy Preston
Murray the K
Jimmy Nicol
Eric Clapton
Neil Aspinall
Mal Evans
Derek Taylor

Who am I missing?

I think this would fit better in Abbey Road, so I'll move it there.

I vote for George Martin, he taught them almost everything they know beyond rock 'n' roll.

I second George Martin.

Originally Posted by feelfab

Some 'fifths'....

Pete Best
Stu Sutcliffe
George Martin
Brian Epstein
Billy Preston
Murray the K
Jimmy Nicol
Eric Clapton
Neil Aspinall
Mal Evans
Derek Taylor

Who am I missing?

It's not a case of who is missing, but you have 11 names to much on that list.
But to go along, I go with George Martin.
Murray the K? What did he do to deserve the title?

I will agree with the masses (surprise surprise) for Sir George.

George Martin or Billy Preston. Billy from an overall musical perspective, with his keyboarding.

I say George Martin.

Originally Posted by feelfab

Some 'fifths'....

Pete Best
Stu Sutcliffe
George Martin
Brian Epstein
Billy Preston
Murray the K
Jimmy Nicol
Eric Clapton
Neil Aspinall
Mal Evans
Derek Taylor

Who am I missing?

I would elimate Best and Sutcliffe from that list because they were/are Beatles.

I would also eliminate all the non musicians from the list.

I think to be a candidate for 'Fifth Beatle' you actually had to have played with them.

In any case, I consider George Martin to be the Fifth Beatle.

Don't get me wrong, I'm crazy about Sir George Martin.

However, even Sir George himself claims that Brian Epstein (who, in all fairness, should be Sir Brian) was much more of a valuable necessity to the Boys than he himself was! George Martin says he would not have given a second listen to The Beatles if it were not for Brian being so fired up and obsessed and persistent about them! And G Martin also almost left them for other jobs a few times, with no regrets. Brian was hopelessly, fatally devoted to them.

Being The Fifth Beatle has more to do with what you were to the other boys rather than what you've done for them, or for anyone or anything else. And, to the Boys, Eppy was "one of them" much, much more than their music producer was. He was the 5th crucial ingredient that made the toppermost of the poppermost possible for them. If not for Brian Epstein, there'd have been no George Martin in their lives.

Paul insists in interviews that G Martin was an important factor in their success, and a top member of their team, but, quote, "If anybody was the fifth Beatle, it was Brian."

George Martin himself said the same thing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_B...her_candidates.
(By the way, I'm not happy with Brian's standing in this Wikipedia entry as being one of the "other candidates" behind George Martin, Billy Preston, and Jimmy Nichol! WTF?!)

Why? Why do people keep insisting that George Martin was The Fifth Beatle? The music was only ONE part of both the phenomenon and the alteration of our culture. The Beatles were SO much more than just the music.

Because Brian didn't have musical talent, that makes George Martin the Fifth Beatle? The Beatles were a miracle of the entire culture of our times. And, to the Boys, Brian was a closer part of that miracle than anyone else.

George Martin was not a part of their tight-knit group, personally. He wasn't the 5th puzzle piece - if anything, he was the 6th. He didn't hang out with them in their off-hours. He didn't go with them on their international tours. He didn't make everything possible for them at any and every hour of every day they wanted or needed anything.

George M is a genius who, along with other miracles, was incredibly astute enough to translate abstract Lennonisms into music. But, he was only the MUSIC genius.

Brian was a part of ALL of it.
G Martin was only essential to the music part.
How many times does this have to be said to get it through peoples' heads?

I think when people throw around the title, "The Fifth Beatle," they don't really think of what that entails. This typical misconception is apparent in this paragraph from a blog:

George Martin - Let’s give the man his props. If anyone deserves the title of “The 5th Beatle” it is truly Sir George. From his Elizabethan piano solo on “In My Life” to gently stirring the psychedelic soup of “Tomorrow Never Knows,” we should all have been so lucky to have this guy at the board.

Once again, the writer believes that the MUSICAL genius and innovation is what makes a fifth Beatle, rather than being accepted by them as being part of them - as they have said Brian was.

Who better to decide who came the closest to being one of the Beatles than the Beatles themselves?

Wake up.

It seems so very obvious to me. Not counting that one thing, the music itself, why would George Martin rate higher than the person who was named The Fifth Beatle by a Beatle himself?

Is it ... because George Martin stayed alive longer?
Because George Martin didn't cause embarrassment to their legacy with his "bungled" business/marketing decision innocence within the entertainment ocean of sharks?
Because George Martin wasn't a poofter? Because George Martin wasn't Jewish?
Because George Martin - what ?
Besides the music part, what?

So one of your prerequisites for Fifth Beatledom is having played or performed with them. George Martin did not perform with them. So, alas, if you can make an exception for Sir George, then I can make an exception for Brian.

So who's the Fifth Beatle?
The proof of being The Fifth Beatle lies in the hearts, not on the charts.

http://dir.salon.com/story/ent/movie...ein/index.html
http://www.gadflyonline.com/archive/...fthbeatle.html

George Martin certainly is the widely popular choice- I tend to agree... but I have my affection for declaring Stuart is the original 5th Beatle!-

Jimmy Tarbuck.



"Fifth Beatle" still enjoying getting the laughs"
Jimmy Tarbuck continues to be passionate about his work

NOT many entertainers can boast more than 40 years of success in the notoriously fickle world of showbusiness or enjoy such a variety of experience, but Jimmy Tarbuck has proven to be one of the country’s most evergreen stars.

He will be sharing anecdotes, taking questions from the audience and performing alongside singer Kenny Lynch at Aldershot’s Princes Hall on May 23 in a show which promises comedy for grown-ups rather than adult comedy.

“I don’t analyse comedy, it’s just a case of what makes me laugh. I don’t subscribe to the view that different comedy works with different audiences. The French are the target for laughs at the moment.”

His introduction to the world of show business was not the result of formal training, more a case of being in the right place at the right time - Liverpool at the start of Beatlemania.

“The Beatles really put Liverpool on the map, and I was known as the fifth Beatle. It certainly didn’t hurt to come from the area at the time. It started this crazy roundabout and I fell into it along with others from the area like Cilla Black.”

Well, perhaps people should start naming Stu, or GMartin, or whoever, as being "my" favorite fifth Beatle rather than "THE" fifth Beatle. He's YOUR fifth Beatle, but not THE fifth Beatle.

Honestly, the only people with the authority and the absolute right to declare who is/was THE Fifth Beatle are the Beatles themselves — and their own extreme inner circle. All others are being quite arrogant and presumptuous, don't you think?
Please read my post more thoroughly; I think my points are quite valid.

I can understand people not admiring or loving Brian as a person, and placing those feelings with another Beatle-associated person, but that doesn't make the other Beatle-associated person "THE" fifth Beatle for everyone.

---
And no, I do not know why that phrase "fifth Beatle" is so damned all-important to me, except maybe because I can still remember back during the days of Beatlemania — that title is what Brian (and Brian alone) was known as — by all the media and his own boys — and he even thought of himself that way. All these newcomers who weren't even alive at the time to see it happening are just throwing around the phrase, and for some stupid reason it bothers me.

Maybe it's bothering me so much because I'm involved in the new Brian movie that's going to be made. The script has been written by the producer, and Hollywood is interested.

With all due respect eppylover, your post are pretty arrogant themselves. Everyone has a right to their opinion. If they choose George Martin so be it. And please don't insult those who weren't there at the time. We are just as big fans as you are.

Originally Posted by Dr. Dreamer

George Martin certainly is the widely popular choice- I tend to agree... but I have my affection for declaring Stuart is the original 5th Beatle!-

I kind of have a soft spot for Stu. His story is so tragic.

I am of the opinioun that there is no such thing as a fifth beatle, but yes I choise George Martin because of the musical side. If it's not everything the Beatles were about, it certainly the most important thing, they were a rock band/ pop group afterall. And that George Martin wasn't jewisch has nothing to do with it, that's just an unfair assumption on your part.

And it's fine that Epstein is your fifth Beatle, but there is no such thing as the fifth Beatle.

Originally Posted by eppylover

Well, perhaps people should start naming Stu, or GMartin, or whoever, as being "my" favorite fifth Beatle rather than "THE" fifth Beatle. He's YOUR fifth Beatle, but not THE fifth Beatle.

Honestly, the only people with the authority and the absolute right to declare who is/was THE Fifth Beatle are the Beatles themselves — and their own extreme inner circle. All others are being quite arrogant and presumptuous, don't you think?
Please read my post more thoroughly; I think my points are quite valid.

I can understand people not admiring or loving Brian as a person, and placing those feelings with another Beatle-associated person, but that doesn't make the other Beatle-associated person "THE" fifth Beatle for everyone.

---
And no, I do not know why that phrase "fifth Beatle" is so damned all-important to me, except maybe because I can still remember back during the days of Beatlemania — that title is what Brian (and Brian alone) was known as — by all the media and his own boys — and he even thought of himself that way. All these newcomers who weren't even alive at the time to see it happening are just throwing around the phrase, and for some stupid reason it bothers me.

Maybe it's bothering me so much because I'm involved in the new Brian movie that's going to be made. The script has been written by the producer, and Hollywood is interested.

Welcome to the forum btw. Looking forward to your posts, not only the ones about Epstein and the new movie.

I tend to think of George Martin because he was in the studio with them almost every day, taking their ideas and showing them how things could be done. Brian was a charming lovely man, but his managerial gifts were limited. He was learning the business as he went along, made the Beatles very visible, but when they retired from public performances, his role as their agent became less necessary. The Beatles outgrew him, just as they outgrew their three-guitars-and-drums setup. He worked within the show-business "establishment," but the Beatles wanted to break away from all that, though they did make some gaffs themselves. He and they were no longer on the same page. But they, with Martin's guidance, tended to grow and explore, making the music that influenced so many.

Yes. Brian got their foot in the door, but GM helped their music career florish.

There's a post over in And Your Bird Can Sing that would really go a long way to supporting the public opinion of who is the 5th Beatle. I had no idea, personally, how many songs Sir George played on which would sound a good bit more hollow without his ivory tickling. His piano playing really fleshed out a considerable number of tunes.

But, if it will make everyone feel better, he can be the 5 1/4 Beatle.