News Reader.info

I watched the Beatles Get Back with a mixture of awe and recognition. Awe because it was a joy to see such talent working and collaborating — and disagreeing — as a creative team. In them I

recognised some of the events of my own working life. Creativity and innovation are much talked about, little understood, and very simple. During the show we see the incredible creative

force of the Beatles. I watched mesmerised as Paul McCartney pulls the song “Get Back” from thin air. Credited as a Lennon/McCartney song, we saw that John Lennon was not even in the room

when Paul created it. I have worked with many creative agencies for many years. In every case the work went like this: a big client (usually with a three-letter name) would present an issue

and ask for a solution. The agency would internally “brainstorm” — which meant the creative director would ask for input from their team. The junior members would shout out ideas and the

“big guy” would tell them why they were wrong. At some point we would all get bored with this and a break would be called. Reconvening a couple of hours later, with the more troublesome

elements removed, the conversation would be more “positive”. Positive was a code word for “agreeing”. From this point on only clichés were accepted. Eventually some options were presented to

the client. The client had no idea how to interpret the ideas presented, but as they had to have an opinion, the vanilla options became even more uninteresting. If the salesperson had any

clout, it would be agreed, and we would go into production. Watching the Beatles at Twickenham Studios, the same thing was happening with a couple of additional twists. People generally have

one of three primary ways of interacting with the world: Auditory, Visual, or Kinaesthetic. In my experience musicians — naturally auditory based — are terrible at visual. Watch the outfits

at any music event and tell me I’m wrong. Of course, there are exceptions. So, the Beatles, while being exceptional musical talents, were ill equipped to evaluate any non-musical proposals

put to them. The idea of an amphitheatre for their big comeback/final show was a wonderful visual idea — but seriously, Tripoli? (Even in 1971, when Gaddafi had recently seized power.)

Europe is full of ancient amphitheatres but at no point were any alternatives suggested. They were simply too big a deal for anyone to try to overrule them. They were also so important that

whatever silly thing they suggested came true. Witness their demand for an anvil and hammer, requested late morning and somehow delivered during lunch. One of the saddest images for me was

George Martin — often referred to as “the fifth Beatle” — apparently reduced to a mere stagehand. You don’t say “no” to a Beatle. The others in the studio, including the film’s director

Michael Lindsay-Hogg, were mostly overawed that they were even “in the room” with the Fab Four. I feel that’s one reason the camera coverage was so poor, despite Lindsay-Hogg having worked

with many pop stars of the time. Another important part of any creative solution is some form of restriction. Good ideas succeed in spite of the problems. When the question of how the

audience would be moved to Tripoli the answer is simple — “we’ll take them there on the QE2”. Because of course Beatles can do this. While most creative solutions have to cleverly overcome

some obstacle, with almost infinite resources there’s nothing to guide you. The end result of this absence of normal limits was a gig on the top of their own building in Savile Row, Mayfair.

Any slightly competent event manager would have told you that it would have precious little audience; would be closed down by the police; would be terrible to film; and would not achieve

any of the objectives set. Further — in my opinion — they created a stage 180 degrees away from where they should have been. But as it was the “compromise solution”, it didn’t offend anyone.

If you have anything to do with ideas or innovation, beware this perfect storm of mediocrity. The client who is too powerful; the lack of competency; and the compromise. It’s a testament

that the Beatles were so FAB that the rooftop concert somehow overcomes all that. But it could have been much more. A MESSAGE FROM THEARTICLE _We are the only publication that’s committed to

covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout the pandemic. So please, make

a donation._