There are a large number of Lennon books, most maintaining John's carefully crafted public image that has been circulating post Beatles and post mortem. Some are too hard to believe. And then there are Lennon's interviews...the angry ones to be taken with a grain of salt, the later ones maybe closer to his true feelings, but how accurate? If Lennon had lived, perhaps we'd have his true feelings and recollections in book form now. All we can do is speculate and try to pick out what he said in anger or farce.
This is why I'm happy about this McCartney book. Of course there's a slant to it, but how could one resist doing so? Lennon's memory has been getting glossed over in book form for decades. I don't favor one over the other (unfortunately, the great partnership of Lennon/McCartney now has people choosing up sides!) but I don't want the people managing John's image (who weren't even there!) to have the final word in the Beatle history books!
McCartney's book is exceptionally interesting. He gets into what it was like to be the biggest star, most eligible bachelor and total rich guy with the world at his feet in the swingin' sixties. How cool, boppin' around London in his Aston Martin! Trendy clubs, willing women, drinks in the wee small hours. He was James Bond, but carried a guitar intead of a gun! While I hold Lennon and McCartney in equal esteem, I believe it was Paul who had more occasion to widen his views on music, art and the world in general during this time, and thus affect the Beatles music.
It is widely known that John and George tired of the fame game quickly. Paul used it as a learning tool. And while I care little for the avant-garde scene of the time, it's cool to learn just how involved in it Paul was, at a time when John was risking becoming an acid casualty. I feel McCartney has the right to set the record (no pun) straight regarding the Beatle's music. First, he was there, and second because the stereotypes are so overwhelming. John, the artistic/experimental? Well, Paul did this or that on his own or on John's tunes. Paul the romantic? Well John wrote this sweet ballad.
Paul doesn't dis Yoko in this book, in fact he's quite kind to her, and clearly still loves John. Paul doesn't deserve to be considered the lesser of the two, which seems to be a minor trend, simply because he was the more musical, which usually came out as more polished, less edgy.
This book gave me more of a clue as to what it was actually like to be a Beatle than any other. On occasion you get a great sense of "being there". And dang, then and now, the guy is cheerful! Throughout, he marvels at how cool it was and how fortunate they all were.
I've read a great number of Beatle books, and have always gotten the impression that early on fame overwhelmed Lennon, and he let go of the "leadership" role, willingly. Clearly, McCartney was the most gung-ho of the four, as well as being the most naturally musically inclined.
The saddest thing I found was, as in accounts about Lennon's Dakota years, even while a Beatle Lennon wasted a lot of time, being wasted and laying about the house, in apparent depression. Even so, at this time he still had the motivation to meet Paul's creative juices head on.
Lennon/McCartney was an incredible force, and this book gives one half of that force the chance to toot his own horn. Is that so wrong? People who've achieved a fraction of what Paul has have written much more boastful books. I can't even justify using the word "boastful" in this case.
PR men and women have written John's story, unfortunately. Paul deserves his say, and does so taking care, seemingly, to be fair to all! Cheers, Paul!

This book is very well done. I am an 8th grader and have used it for several reports and I have gotten A's on them all. Although for a young reader it is a bit lengthy, it is worth it. I like the style of how Barry Miles puts large pieces of his interviews with McCartney within the text. This makes you see how both Miles and McCartney see an event or time period. It gives McCartney a chance to tell his side of the events and it makes the book very good. I recomend it for all ages, very well written.

There is a certain segment of John Lennon fans who choose to deify Lennon and find any reason to despise Paul McCartney. They seem to forget that Paul has lived under many years of John having lied outright about Paul's contributions, and the Lennon brigade have repeated those lies. If Paul is defensive and insecure (and he is), he at least sees John through the eyes of love in this book, which is something John didn't always do in return.

It's flawed and stilted, but the subject has rarely been treated fairly in other books, so one can understand if he's a bit self-protective.

You're not going to find a better book that points out Paul's contributions to the Beatles. Paul's cooperation and reflections are the bulk of the book. Between passages of history, McCartney adds long quotes about his memories and experiences of specific events. He disagrees with the public record on some pretty interesting things.

First, he doesn't believe the popularly held idea that the death of Brian Epstein was anything but an accident.

Second, he says that the Beatles were never angry at the Maharishi. They didn't consider him a fraud as popularly reported. They had just learned everything they needed to learn from him and they wanted to get back to real life. Paul says he still meditates using the mantra taught to him by the Mararishi. John's song Sexy Sadie was indeed about some disillusionment with the spiritual leader, but the feelings weren't lasting.

Third, the collaboration between John and Paul lasted into the later years of the Beatles when most people assumed that they were writing their songs solo and tacking on the other's name. Paul talks about John's help with Hey Jude and his own contribution to the Ballad of John and Yoko.

Fourth, Paul is very fair with everyone. He doesn't blame Yoko for breaking up the Beatles. He thinks that Yoko probably saved the H addicted John's life and thus extended the life of the Beatles. He surprisingly doesn't blame Yoko for his conflicted relationship with John after the breakup.

People can argue on whether McCartney's vision is the reality or what he wants to portray. Either way, you won't get a complete picture of the Beatles without reading this book.

...of feeling some disappointment, I felt this was worth reading.

An inveterate Paul McCartney fan, I was interested in what this author had to say about the former Beatle and highly gifted performer. Although I found the love between Linda and Paul lovely and highly moving, I was displeased to see how harshly John was described. It was like a yin-yang balance - the tone used in describing Paul was one of fawning deference and on the other hand, John was described in an almost condemnatory fashion. I didn't like that.

On the plus side, the lighter moments such as Paul and Linda's trips to New York were cheery and loving. I also enjoyed reading about the final Beatle movie, "Let It Be" which is more or less a chronicle of the dissolution of the group.

I found this work to be mediocre.