From: dmac@julia.math.ucla.edu (saki)
Subject: There's a place....
Organization: UCLA Mathematics Department
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 17:57:30 GMT

Somehow I managed to let the whole month of September get by me without
an essential acknolwedgement. Maybe it's appropriate to do this now, 
then, before more time wafts by...and especially today, which is to
many of us still/always a date worthy of reflection.

The gentleman who deserves praise lurks about now and again. He's busy
in the real world with real work and has little time to join in. But
a little over five years ago, he was the prime mover behind the 
establishment of this newsgroup, which has now amassed a half decade
of posts. Born out of great controversy, as I recall---its nascence
resisted by the establishment in rec.music.misc., who foresaw general
world anarchy if individual music groups were allowed to exist!---the
beginnings of rec.music.beatles were both humble and tempestuous.

Its originator was Jim Kendall. He was, and is, as much a raving
Beatlemaniac as any of us. When I first came to this newsgroup only
a few days after its appearance in the Usenet hierarchy, I knew I was
in the presence of Real Beatles Scholars. I had only just discovered
how to access newsgroups at all, by poking around the process-status
table and finding out about this mysterious command called "rn" that
people seemed to enjoy using. What would happen if I did the same? 
Suddenly it seemed as though the gates of Emerald City opened before
me...and wonder of wonders, there was a computer newsgroup *about the
Fabs!*

I was in awe of those first few posts. It seemed they all knew their
stuff...certainly more than I did. I had always loved the Boys, of course, 
but this was the first time I saw intellectual discussions on the variant
takes of the *early* "One After 909"...and vociferous discussions at
that. These r.m.b. people had real passion for their subject. It was
somewhat intimidating, even for the likes of me who actually remembered
the Beatles' favorite colors and what they liked for breakfast. For
weeks I just read, too uncertain of Usenet technology and my own
seemingly-paltry mental database of Beatles lore to utter an electronic
sound. It's tough when you're in the shadow of experts. :-)

To a newcomer, it seemed as though there were thousands of Beatles
mavens pouring forth their ideas. Jim Kendall has since told me that
at first it was really only himself and the equally knowledgeable
Jay C. Smith (who is, thankfully, still with us), trading witty barbs
back and forth. But I remember some other early participants as well---
surely Colm Mulcahy was there, and Richard Cook, maybe Joe Brennan?

I hesitate to name any other luminaries who have shared this honorable
arena over the years, not so much because I can't remember them all
but because I couldn't type in all their names. There's been a
steady stream of participants, all with varying levels of expertise,
but almost all (I think it's safe to say) with a shared love of the
music and the composers whose art we celebrate. That's more important
than any acquired lore. I've also been pleased to see the wide range
of ages in r.m.b., and especially the addition of new voices every
September, when colleges, in their wisdom, hand out computer accounts
to all students. 

Sometimes, I imagine, there are unexpressed frustrations out there
among the wide range of readers who never post, for whatever reason.
Our esteemed newsgroup tends to be heavily text-based---a development
pretty much concurrent with the change in Beatles scholarship in 1987,
whe Mark Lewisohn's first book was published, resulting for the first
time in sourcebooks based on real documentation, not just legends and
memories of the Boys and their extensive entourage. As a historian
myself, I don't mind this. Without jumping up and down too much, I
think this was a milestone in Beatles lore and only makes a group
like this more valuable over time. Of course it cuts out a large
number of people who feel, perchance, they're not equipped to wade
into the discussion, or who prefer a less intense mode of electronic
interaction. 

But participation, on whatever level, leads to knowledge. I can't think
that that's a bad thing. You can learn exactly what you like from this
newsgroup, and you can contribute the same. For that, in particular,
I must also thank the venerated Mr. Kendall. Through r.m.b., over the
five years I've been here, I've learned more than I could ever have
known through just my own research. There are areas I can't touch...
and past discussions of music theory, the "Get Back" sessions, 
Twickenham Studios, bootlegs, mix variations, and more have opened
my mind to new vistas. The wealth of immediate curiosity, and earnest
pursuit of the facts, is one of r.m.b.'s strongest assets. It's a
credit to the regulars that they manage (most of the time) to argue
a point with academic heat but without fanatical flamage. :-)

Thanks to Mr. Kendall, I've also enjoyed a forum that forces me to
keep up with the facts---that has, indeed, taught me how to think
fairly straight; that has given me the opportunity to hone my prose;
and that has provided an outlet for the passion I felt the instant
I saw the Beatles perform their first number on 7 February 1964.

There are few places where one can effuse like a ten-year-old over
subjects like ours---music which still holds its magic after thirty
years, and four men who remain an inspiration far beyond the boundaries
of mere phenomena. Rec.music.beatles is one such place...maybe the
*only* place...and for that, I want to give Mr. Kendall and all who 
have touched this newsgroup my ardent thanks.

--
"The Lana Sisters, clad in pink, added a welcome feminine flavour.
'Much better than those Beatles' I heard one gentleman remark."
------------------------------------------------------------------
saki (dmac@math.ucla.edu)