The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread

[SMiLE-addict]

Yeah I agree with rockandroll. IMO Lennon reached his apex on Rubber Soul (Nowhere Man, In My Life, Girl, Norwegian Wood). After that he still had a lot of really good stuff but never quite reached the level he did on Rubber Soul.

I will make one possible exception to that - the song Number 9 Dream. In a sense that song has some of the same evocative qualities some of his Rubber Soul songs had, but one could argue it was a bit more mature work.

[halblaineisgood]

.

[halblaineisgood]

.

[halblaineisgood]

.

[halblaineisgood]

.

[Lonely Summer]

John was definitely the dominant Beatle up to 65, although a lot of the "John" songs had Paul's help. Starting with Revolver, Paul is more prolific, but even when Paul dominates an album - Pepper, for example - I find it is John's songs I like the best (Lucy in the Sky, A Day in the Life, A Little Help from My Friends). Solo, sometimes he was more about the message he was trying to get across (Sometime in NYC) than the music; but when focused on making an accessible, commercial album (Imagine), it was as good as the best stuff Paul or George came up with. I'm not a huge fan of Double Fantasy, though. The whole thing just seems so super polished, no rough edges. John was supposed to be the rocker, right? I like Milk and Honey a lot better, it feels more real.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

John was supposed to be the rocker, right?

I guess but I think this has been overstressed by both fans and Lennon himself. For as much as Lennon loved people like Chuck Berry and Larry Williams, he was equally interested in rockabilly (Elvis, Carl Perkins, Johnny Burnette), and R&B (The Miracles, Mary Wells, The Impressions). One of Lennon's all time favourites, if not favourite was Gene Vincent's Be-bop-a-lula, which, although undeniably rock and roll as well as subversive for its time, is not necessary a "hard" song. To those who came of age in the Classic Rock FM years, being a rocker meant something different to someone who came of age in the late 50s. And given that Lennon gorged himself on the Motown sound in the early to mid-60s, he was clearly a guy who didn't mind a bit of polish, no matter what he may have said to the contrary.

Personally, I hear more of Lennon's early music influences on songs like Starting Over and Woman than just about any other song he made during the solo years (apart from the whole Rock and Roll album, of course, and a few particular others).

[Amanda Hart]

My opinion: Lennon was a great songwriter throughout the 70's. His problem was that he was a terrible producer. TER-RIB-BLE. 
Even his albums that have a Phil Spector credit were mostly produced by him.

I think that's exactly what holds me back from really getting into most of his solo catalog. Many of the songs are good, but they just don't sound good.

[Ron]

John was supposed to be the rocker, right?

Personally, I hear more of Lennon's early music influences on songs like Starting Over and Woman than just about any other song he made during the solo years (apart from the whole Rock and Roll album, of course, and a few particular others).

I've always thought that too.  Very solid traditional stuff, I think the future for him would have had more music like that. 

[Lonely Summer]

John was supposed to be the rocker, right?

Personally, I hear more of Lennon's early music influences on songs like Starting Over and Woman than just about any other song he made during the solo years (apart from the whole Rock and Roll album, of course, and a few particular others).

I've always thought that too.  Very solid traditional stuff, I think the future for him would have had more music like that. 

The songs are great, I just think the production is a bit sterile.

[Gabo]

I sometimes like sterile.

I'm trying to decide why I am not digging Mind Games. Is it the bland melodies? Silly lyrics? Muddy production?

[Lonely Summer]

I sometimes like sterile.

I'm trying to decide why I am not digging Mind Games. Is it the bland melodies? Silly lyrics? Muddy production?

Mind Games never rises to the level of Imagine, but it's a fine album. Gotta love Tight A$, Bring on the Lucie, and the title song. I think Walls and Bridges is the best of those mid-70's albums, though. I know I should love Rock 'N' Roll, but I'm not sure that the Spector approach was right for those songs. The best cuts on that album didn't even have Phil involved.

[pixletwin]

The best cuts on that album didn't even have Phil involved.

Taking into account my views on Lennon's production style, I completely agree with you... Although the Spector tracks recorded when John is drunk also hold a special place in my heart.

#bemybabyrocks

[beatnickle]

Instant Karma....... As good a rock song that was ever written or performed. One of many by him I love. John was one interesting motherf*cker. He was deep and was the soul of the Beatles with George in second place and Mccartney the talented school principle. "Give my regards to Broad Street " reveals who McCartney really is. Talented and vain  but not too deep.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

"Give my regards to Broad Street " reveals who McCartney really is. Talented and vain  but not too deep.

I disagree. McCartney's strengths primarily are in music. You are correct that he is vain enough that he seems to have always felt that he has the ability to delve into other mediums as a writer (Magical Mystery Tour, Broad Street) when he, in fact, does not. Broad Street is, essentially, a movie made by an amateur screenwriter and it shows. That's not to say there aren't some interesting aspects - the dream sequence in the movie is, I think, pretty good and shows that Paul has at least some rudimentary knowledge of basic psychological interpretations of dreams.

However, I do think that McCartney is capable of a great deal of depth: For No One, She's Leaving Home, Another Day, for examples are really eloquent character portraits.

[pixletwin]

McCartney can be deep. He just doesn't wear it on his sleeve.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

McCartney can be deep. He just doesn't wear it on his sleeve.

Agreed. In fact, Lennon was at his best when he used the kind of subtlety that McCartney was more accustomed to.

[guitarfool2002]

After seeing Be-Bop-A-Lula and Double Fantasy mentioned, I had to pitch in my 2 cents. 

That Gene Vincent song was and always remained a prime influence on John, but consider the influence beyond the song itself and consider something musician-centric. The way Gene put hard accents on his consonants (I know...bear with me...) as he sang the lyrics helped trigger the slapback tape delay even more than it normally would do on a vocal. Lennon studied that song, copied the vocal style and delivery, and even before he knew what tape delay was he had that similar hard-accent style in his vocal delivery. Engineers who recorded Lennon's vocals have said he not only requested delay on his voice as he recorded, but that he also knew how to phrase and voice words so the delay hit just right. Geoff Emerick, for one, says Lennon was one of the best singers he worked with in terms of using the delay to its best potential as an effect. "A Day In The Life" is a prime example. Lennon had that happening as late as the Double Fantasy sessions...listen to the lead vocal on "Just Like Starting Over". Underneath the late 70's production, it's rockabilly Lennon doing the Gene Vincent thing with tape delay in full force. That in itself is one of Lennon's calling cards as a singer, he really had a unique yet retro sound when he got into that kind of groove with a song, and it's traced back to Gene Vincent.

With Gene and "Be Bop..." in general, i think there was a major cultural/pop culture thing going on with both the records and the film "The Girl Can't Help It" that in 2014 we have no sense of, or not much comparison. Watch Gene and the "Blue Caps" in that or any other video. For one, Gene had a bad leg and could not move around like Elvis, so he had this unusual stance when performing that was even more aggressive than Elvis, and perhaps not as overtly sexual but more mysterious. Elvis might have looked like he was balling, while Gene might have looked like he had a switchblade in his back pocket or something. It's hard to describe, but I can imagine what kids like Lennon were thinking when they watched that film. And also, the rhythm guitarist in the Blue Caps looks like a juvenile delinquent who was aboyut 5 seconds away from smashing his guitar and getting into a rumble...in 1950's lingo. It was miles away from Bill Haley, different from Elvis, and an image which fit a song like Link Wray's "Rumble" for impressionable kids as much as the idealized image of Eddie Cochran struck a chord with UK teenagers like Lennon for similar but different reasons.

I don't think Lennon ever lost that kind of powerful imagery he had developed in his mind in the 50's about what rock and roll is or should be, and even on Double Fantasy/Milk And Honey that aspect of Lennon as a rocker comes out. I think he always wanted to sound like Gene Vincent, even though at times he'd deliberately try to downplay the influence in his style.

With Double Fantasy: Time has brought out a lot of great information about what went into those sessions, especially from the players like Earl Slick who were on the album. The list could be massive, but one that stuck out was having the band Cheap Trick brought in to record as John's backing band. They tried a few tunes, but ultimately it didn't work out and was lost to history what it could have been if it had worked.

But one story that I loved was how Cheap Trick, especially Rick Nielsen, were major Beatles fans and were thrilled to be working with John. Rick - a guitar freak - showed up expecting to see the classic Beatle guitars in use. John instead had his trusty Ovation, as well as a new futuristic guitar made by a custom builder that he tried on some sessions. Nielsen expecting to see a Rickenbacker at least may have even considered asking John why wasn't he playing his cool guitars! But I think that very, very minor story shows where John's mind was at versus what fans wanted or expected to see and hear from John. A band like Cheap Trick, one of the hotter bands at that time, went in expecting to see John with a Beatle guitar and got John with both a boring/utilitarian acoustic and some bizarre one-off model that wasn't even practical. Some of the musicians working the sessions were younger and liked to party - I think they expected something of John other than what they got, which was a family man into eating macrobiotic veggie meals who would go home at a normal time and all the usual domestic stuff. It wasn't the John from earlier in the 70's who was known for bringing gallon jugs of vodka to recording sessions, then tearing up the town and holding court with the likes of Harry Nilsson and Jesse Ed Davis.

And he was 40 years old, carrying these images and expectations into making new music. Just that alone...40 years old not only seems younger today in 2014 than it did in 1980, but also consider how that influenced the songs on those sessions. There are some real, genuinely great Lennon songwriting moments on those sessions. In some ways "Nobody Told Me" was as perfect for when it did get released a few years later as it was when he recorded but shelved it. It was the rockabilly Lennon, the Beatle Lennon, the sarcastic Lennon, and it was also the psychic Lennon describing the "Big Chill" generational effect years before it became an identifiable thing once it played out on the big screen. Watching The Wheels, Woman, Just Like Starting Over...highlights, right? A young band expecting Beatle John like Cheap Trick might not have worked for that kind of songwriting had they backed him instrumentally.

But consider again what we think of when we hit age 40 today versus how Lennon was viewed at age 40, and it's pretty striking. It definitely shades the 1980 sessions differently in retrospect.

[pixletwin]

What a great post guitarfool. Thanks for sharing.

[beatnickle]

However, I do think that McCartney is capable of a great deal of depth:

"Give my regards to Broad Street " reveals who McCartney really is. Talented and vain  but not too deep.

However, I do think that McCartney is capable of a great deal of depth: For No One, She's Leaving Home, Another Day, for examples are really eloquent character portraits.

 I am speaking relatively about Paul. Sure, Paul had some depth, but,  no way is he as deep as John or George. Heck. George was probably the deepest Beatle of all.  At least when George got involved in movies he decided to give financial backing to " The Life of Brian " as opposed to a vanity piece like Paul's rubbish of a movie.
 I already stated that Paul was very talented....... the best musician in the Beatles........ but he still came in third place in the depth department.

[Ron]

I read a review one time where a guy was mentioning something interesting about Mind Games (the single). 

He made the point of how ballsy of a writer John was, because he put the "Mi-ah-innd-Mi-ah-innd--Games..." part, right at the beginnig of the song!  Any other writer would have done that on the last chorus, but not John, f*** it, he put it right on the first one. 

I think he was a fantastic writer, something like "Woman" is a nearly perfect song imho.  Or how he sings harmony with himself in "Just Like Starting Over"...

[Ron]

However, I do think that McCartney is capable of a great deal of depth:

"Give my regards to Broad Street " reveals who McCartney really is. Talented and vain  but not too deep.

However, I do think that McCartney is capable of a great deal of depth: For No One, She's Leaving Home, Another Day, for examples are really eloquent character portraits.

 I am speaking relatively about Paul. Sure, Paul had some depth, but,  no way is he as deep as John or George. Heck. George was probably the deepest Beatle of all.  At least when George got involved in movies he decided to give financial backing to " The Life of Brian " as opposed to a vanity piece like Paul's rubbish of a movie.
 I already stated that Paul was very talented....... the best musician in the Beatles........ but he still came in third place in the depth department.

A lot of people see 'depth' as pretentious.  Many people strive to NOT be seen as 'deep'. 

Paul gave me as much to think about with "Silly Love Songs" , as John did with "Working Class Hero"

[Lonely Summer]

However, I do think that McCartney is capable of a great deal of depth:

"Give my regards to Broad Street " reveals who McCartney really is. Talented and vain  but not too deep.

However, I do think that McCartney is capable of a great deal of depth: For No One, She's Leaving Home, Another Day, for examples are really eloquent character portraits.

 I am speaking relatively about Paul. Sure, Paul had some depth, but,  no way is he as deep as John or George. Heck. George was probably the deepest Beatle of all.  At least when George got involved in movies he decided to give financial backing to " The Life of Brian " as opposed to a vanity piece like Paul's rubbish of a movie.
 I already stated that Paul was very talented....... the best musician in the Beatles........ but he still came in third place in the depth department.

George said he financed "Life of Brian" because he wanted to see the movie. Nice. I think George was always more into promoting the work of his friends than his own stuff. He'd gladly go on VH1 and promote Ravi Shankar's work, or come out of retirement to do a Carl Perkins show. Just one of many things I love about that man.

[beatnickle]

However, I do think that McCartney is capable of a great deal of depth:

"Give my regards to Broad Street " reveals who McCartney really is. Talented and vain  but not too deep.

However, I do think that McCartney is capable of a great deal of depth: For No One, She's Leaving Home, Another Day, for examples are really eloquent character portraits.

 I am speaking relatively about Paul. Sure, Paul had some depth, but,  no way is he as deep as John or George. Heck. George was probably the deepest Beatle of all.  At least when George got involved in movies he decided to give financial backing to " The Life of Brian " as opposed to a vanity piece like Paul's rubbish of a movie.
 I already stated that Paul was very talented....... the best musician in the Beatles........ but he still came in third place in the depth department.

A lot of people see 'depth' as pretentious.  Many people strive to NOT be seen as 'deep'. 

Paul gave me as much to think about with "Silly Love Songs" , as John did with "Working Class Hero"

  I do not for one minute believe George or John were pretentious. Quite the contrary.
Whatever floats your boat if you find a lot of wisdom in " Silly Love Songs"

[Chocolate Shake Man]

I suppose this speaks to the subjectivity of music.

Of course, I love George's music and think he was a very intelligent person but I do not hear more depth in his music than I do Paul's. Some songs, yes: While My Guitar Gently Weeps, Something, and All Things Must Pass are all good examples of his lyrical achievements. However, I think most of songs are better for their musical quality than their lyrical quality. Most of the time, I feel that he resorts to a kind of plain-speak or a kind of spirituality which if someone on the street said to me I'd think they were crazy. Again, I don't want to overstate this because I think George was a very good musician and songwriter and a crucial component of The Beatles. But, overall, I don't think George was nearly as capable as Paul as using the lyric for any kind of sophisticated storytelling.

Silly Love Songs, I think, is a very clever song. In fact, if you want to take a song to showcase Paul's lyrical immaturity, this would not be the one, in my opinion. The fact that the song is ironically commenting on itself is smart and makes the lyric a more complicated one than most.