New Info From A Very Interesting Book

I was reading a book by H.V. (Har Van) Fulpen, The Beatles:  An Illustrated Diary, first published in the U.S. in 1985.  Fulpen was former head of the Dutch Beatles fan club.  He said he had access to a very large collection of Beatles memorabilia that he himself had put together since 1963 and that he had also purchased other archival material.  He thanked Freda Kelly (who ran the English Beatles fan club), Allan Williams (who was the group's first manager), Bob Wooler (who was a host at the Cavern Club), Dezo Hoffmann (who photographed the early Beatles), and Piet Schreuders (who later wrote books about the Beatles.)

I'll put a small caveat in on this book -- I found several errors when I read his information about the years that interested me:  1964-1966 and his take on the 1969 Paul-Is-Dead rumor.  Still . . .

Fulpen's book had four extremely noteworthy additions to the Paul mystery.

1.)  Fulpen had a two-page feature about the Beatles cartoon series that ran in the U.S. on Saturdays in 1965.  He reprinted the drawings of artist Peter Sander who was commisssioned to design the character models of each Beatle.  Sander said his drawings were based on the Beatles' film, A Hard Day's Night. The movie definitely had our Paul in it, and in both the Paul and George studies, Sander says the the two men are the same height.  There have been dozens of comparisons shown on Paul dead/replaced discussion boards that prove that at varying times Paul was:  shorter, taller, or equal in height to George.  So this adds more proof that there had been MORE THAN ONE PAUL in the group.

2.)  In Fulpen's chronology for 1966, he has for the dates:

- October 14, 1966     "Paul begins writing the music for a film titled The Family Way; soon after he leaves
                                    for a vacation in Kenya."
- November 19, 1966  "Paul returns from Kenya."
 In between those two entries is the most extraordinary bit of information that--if true--is the first  confirmation of its kind I have read:
- November 9, 1966     "Paul is involved in an automobile accident.  Several years later, during the 'Paul is Dead' uproar, rumour will have it that he was fatally injured in this collision."
 Again, on the Paul dead/replaced boards, they show that the Paul in Kenya is NOT our Paul.  Take a look at two photos from film of "Paul"'s Kenyan trip.  It's not Paul,
 right?  The new, new Beatles began work on the Sgt. Pepper album November 24, 1966, a scant 40 days after "Paul" began his vacation.  There is no evidence from the photos of "Paul" from the Kenyan trip that he was injured in an automobile collision at all and no evidence in an interview given December 20, 1966 when the "Beatles" entered the EMI recording studio that "Paul" had in any way been injured in a accident. (Take a look at a photo below from the interview and you can see the whole interview on Youtube at:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exracy8Bsy4 .

 If it wasn't that Paul who had been injured, was it, instead, our Paul?  He could have died, he could have lived.  My guess is that he DID  have an accident and DID live.








3.)  Fulpen's Beatles diary entry of  April 5, 1966 talks about Jane Asher's birthday, and---
"John and Paul sell off a portion of their shares in Northern Songs, each receiving 146,000 pounds.  Their remaining shares are worth some 1,000,000 pounds."  This is a crucial time when, I believe, Paul (and John) were planning their exit (or were being told they were being replaced.)  Since Paul had already spent money on his London house and the renovations on it, and the farm in Scotland our Paul bought in June, 1966 only cost 35,000 pounds, Paul obviously wanted money for some other purpose.

4.)  Fulpen details the 1969 Paul-Is-Dead rumor and hints strongly that the Sgt. Pepper-on Paul wasn't the Paul of earlier in 1966:  "After all, all four members of the group had suddenly started to wear moustaches and beads at the end of that year, for no particular reason.  Unless of course it was to conceal the fact that one Beatle's face, the face of 'Paul McCartney' had undergone some subtle--and sinister--changes . . . ."