The Smiley Smile Message Board

Non Smiley Smile Stuff => General Music Discussion => Topic started by: Gabo on July 09, 2014, 09:05:45 PM



Title: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Gabo on July 09, 2014, 09:05:45 PM
I'm obsessed with this man. Have you heard of him?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uljqhaoykHQ



Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: bluesno1fann on July 09, 2014, 09:52:21 PM
I like John Lennon's work, but he was a real arsehole in his private life.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Please delete my account on July 10, 2014, 01:24:25 AM
A great artist and writer. Shame he is almost forgotten today except for the few songs he wrote featured on "Beach Boys Party".


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Lowbacca on July 10, 2014, 02:06:17 AM
A great artist and writer. Shame he is almost forgotten today except for the few songs he wrote featured on "Beach Boys Party".
:lol



A bastard and a beautiful soul. A true and complicated artist. Funny as hell. Guess I'll never get tired reading about his life and listening to his music.

(http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lli2claYfC1qaalrko1_500.gif)


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Ron on July 10, 2014, 04:39:36 PM
I don't feel he was an asshole in his life.  I think this clip gives a good view of how he was privately.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27Q_AG_nLIo



Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: alf wiedersehen on July 10, 2014, 04:47:52 PM
He beat his wife.
That's a strong case for being an asshole.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Niko on July 10, 2014, 05:01:32 PM
Public Lennon was witty, funny, charming....
Private Lennon was a real dick.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: bluesno1fann on July 10, 2014, 05:15:35 PM
He beat his wife.
That's a strong case for being an asshole.

Not to mention neglecting his child (Julian) to the point where Julian said Paul was more of a father to him than John


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 10, 2014, 05:31:19 PM
.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Gabo on July 10, 2014, 05:38:30 PM
Whatever problems Lennon had with his first family was brought on by the pressures of wealth and fame. And youth. Being a rock star is a 24-7 job, not a 9-5er.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Niko on July 10, 2014, 05:43:24 PM
That's no excuse. The other Beatles did fine (no wife beating, child neglect), as did the members of the BBs.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 10, 2014, 05:48:32 PM
.



Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: alf wiedersehen on July 10, 2014, 05:51:19 PM
I'll really dive into it:

  • He failed to acknowledge that he had a wife, as to not put off his female fan base.
  • He beat and cheated on his wife.
  • He beat up a friend for jokingly saying that he was gay. John said “he called me a queer, so I battered his bloody ribs in.”
  • He apparently had an affair with Brian Epstein, and then proceeded to mock Brian for being gay.
  • He also made fun of him for being Jewish.
  • He suggested the titles Queer Jew and A Cellarful of Boys as Epstein's biography titles.
  • He had no relationship with his son, Julian, most likely because he was illegitimate.
  • When he died, he left "very little" (according to Julian) to him in his will.

Pressures of fame, my ass.



Don't get me wrong, I like John. But, saying he wasn't a prick just doesn't make sense to me.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 10, 2014, 05:53:27 PM
.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Niko on July 10, 2014, 05:53:33 PM
Yeah ringo says he doesn't remember sh*t. Probably to try and excuse himself from what he was up to.

Raymond was correct in the art vs artist debate. Regardless of what Lennon did he wrote some amazing stuffs. And the greatest! songs.

Agreed. Let's move on.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Gabo on July 10, 2014, 05:58:51 PM
I love "Julia."  The song musically evokes its lyrics in a way that you almost never hear . It really sounds like the ocean... One of the most incredible songs I have ever heard. It gets me choked up sometimes. Too beautiful.

And Lennon's voice. I'd say his vocals were synonymous with the "sound" of the Beatles. It really gave them something unique as an ensemble.



Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: bluesno1fann on July 10, 2014, 06:03:00 PM
That's no excuse. The other Beatles did fine (no wife beating, child neglect), as did the members of the BBs.
Ehh...I didn't wanna get into this...but Ringo allegedly beat Barbara Bach in the late 80's.
Damnit.
I thought we had decided to "Separate the art from the crimes.." ,as Rei said.  I didn't want to mention Ringo was a wife beater... but Mr. Woodmesiter made me do it.



Yes, which is why I'm still able to enjoy listening to his amazing work, be it Beatles or Solo!


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 10, 2014, 06:04:14 PM
.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: bluesno1fann on July 10, 2014, 06:07:47 PM
I'll really dive into it:

  • He failed to acknowledge that he had a wife, as to not put off his female fan base.
  • He beat and cheated on his wife.
  • He beat up a friend for jokingly saying that he was gay. John said “he called me a queer, so I battered his bloody ribs in.”
  • He apparently had an affair with Brian Epstein, and then proceeded to mock Brian for being gay.
  • He also made fun of him for being Jewish.
  • He suggested the titles Queer Jew and A Cellarful of Boys as Epstein's biography titles.
  • He had no relationship with his son, Julian, most likely because he was illegitimate.
  • When he died, he left "very little" (according to Julian) to him in his will.

Pressures of fame, my ass.



Don't get me wrong, I like John. But, saying he wasn't a prick just doesn't make sense to me.

He was apparently beating girls before the Beatles made it big as well...


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: pixletwin on July 10, 2014, 07:08:36 PM
Lennon was part Jesus and part Hitler. Part Obiwan Kenobi and part Darth Vader, like most everyone of us I reckon.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: rogerlancelot on July 10, 2014, 07:34:48 PM
He beat his wife.
That's a strong case for being an asshole.

So did Mike Love (over smoking).


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: smilethebeachboysloveyou on July 10, 2014, 08:44:06 PM
A great artist and writer. Shame he is almost forgotten today except for the few songs he wrote featured on "Beach Boys Party".

I also recently found out that he wrote that song "Imagine" that Mike Love used to sing in the '80s.  The original is worth checking out, though obviously I prefer Mike's version.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Niko on July 10, 2014, 08:48:22 PM
Obviously. John Lennon's isn't all that funny, which is weird, cuz Mike's version puts me in stitches every time.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: rogerlancelot on July 10, 2014, 09:07:12 PM
Actually, now that I think about it, I grew up to the sound of John Lennon's voice so I find it quite soothing at times. Technically there are way better singers out there but he had a unique sound that I've always loved. Despite him being a bad guy or not, I often wish he was still around even writing books or something as he had a very interesting mind. I also believe that the act of him getting killed raised him up to an almost Jesus-like status where people remember him for only the good things and it does get a bit ridiculous at times when he is marketed in a way that is a stark contrast as to who he really was.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on July 10, 2014, 09:14:39 PM
2OP:How does one pronounce the name Gabo? Is it gaybo? Is it gahbo?
I say Gabo as in German, as I do every weird username (TdHabib, dombanzai, sangheon).

John is not my favorite as a beatle or solo artist & to me he rarely had shining mo's as a vocalist. To top it all off, he was terrible guitarist, I'm more fond of his Mellotron:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9waBYt0WDU (#4 could be an apt score to a black-and-white horror, I like to add scary singalongs to it using reverb & lots of echo/flanger)


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Niko on July 10, 2014, 09:50:58 PM
John was a great (rhythm) guitarist. Focus on what he's playing on stuff like Can't Buy Me Love. It's dirty and strong.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: 18thofMay on July 10, 2014, 09:54:58 PM
I'll really dive into it:

  • He failed to acknowledge that he had a wife, as to not put off his female fan base.
  • He beat and cheated on his wife.
  • He beat up a friend for jokingly saying that he was gay. John said “he called me a queer, so I battered his bloody ribs in.”
  • He apparently had an affair with Brian Epstein, and then proceeded to mock Brian for being gay.
  • He also made fun of him for being Jewish.
  • He suggested the titles Queer Jew and A Cellarful of Boys as Epstein's biography titles.
  • He had no relationship with his son, Julian, most likely because he was illegitimate.
  • When he died, he left "very little" (according to Julian) to him in his will.

Pressures of fame, my ass.



Don't get me wrong, I like John. But, saying he wasn't a prick just doesn't make sense to me.
"apparently" had an affair with Brian.... Unconfirmed-never will be, did not happen!


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on July 10, 2014, 10:20:57 PM
John was a great (rhythm) guitarist. Focus on what he's playing on stuff like Can't Buy Me Love. It's dirty and strong.
One of the mods of our Beatles site, a big fan of John said that he's an awful lead guitarist. Bob said it as a musician who knows everything about guitars & gives an objective opinion on music in general (regardless of taste). If I get it right, rhythm guitar is sth. else entirely, both by methods of playing & sound. So maybe it's where John is more comfy.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Niko on July 10, 2014, 10:44:36 PM
Johns had some great lead moments. Honey Pie is a good solo. Also some Let It Be stuff. He didn't do a lot if lead guitar but I've always liked his playing when he does play lead.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Ron on July 10, 2014, 11:15:16 PM
He beat his wife.
That's a strong case for being an asshole.

That's a good point, but I think there's a marked difference between 1965 John Lennon and 1972 John Lennon. 


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Ron on July 10, 2014, 11:19:45 PM
John was a great (rhythm) guitarist. Focus on what he's playing on stuff like Can't Buy Me Love. It's dirty and strong.
One of the mods of our Beatles site, a big fan of John said that he's an awful lead guitarist. Bob said it as a musician who knows everything about guitars & gives an objective opinion on music in general (regardless of taste). If I get it right, rhythm guitar is sth. else entirely, both by methods of playing & sound. So maybe it's where John is more comfy.

I always liked John's guitar playing.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: alf wiedersehen on July 10, 2014, 11:25:49 PM
"Julia" is made up of a basic finger-style pattern that Donovan taught him.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Ron on July 10, 2014, 11:31:19 PM
Oh, o.k., I'll edit that out then. 


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: pixletwin on July 11, 2014, 06:42:41 AM
Some folks in here apparently take the Goldman biography (a rotten piece of writing) as if it's the bible.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 11, 2014, 08:37:39 AM
.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 11, 2014, 08:43:30 AM
.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: the captain on July 11, 2014, 08:52:19 AM
People who want to call other people stupid should spell properly. It might boost credibility in the area of intelligence. But I agree about the music focus.

Lennon isn't nearly as high on my list as he is on many others' in that respect. He was an integral part of some hugely important music--the world doesn't need me to say that--but he's at best the second-most talented Beatle, musically speaking. He did have a charisma, both in personality and the personality of his music, that made his best work affecting.

But in my opinion, he's overrated as an individual musician (and lyricist). I love some of his work and am a fan. But he's just an interesting rock n roller to me.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: pixletwin on July 11, 2014, 08:56:20 AM
That was my impression too halblaineisgod. It reminds me of kids who watch themselves smoke.  :lol

I like John's guitar playing. His leads weren't slick or graceful like Paul and George's. But they rocked.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 11, 2014, 09:17:01 AM
.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: alf wiedersehen on July 11, 2014, 11:04:47 AM
"apparently" had an affair with Brian.... Unconfirmed-never will be, did not happen!

That's beside the point, really.

Some folks in here apparently take the Goldman biography (a rotten piece of writing) as if it's the bible.

I've never heard of this book, let alone read it.

Some folks here apparently think that because they're young whippersnappers they can "shock" all the old -timers (+Gabo)

I have no interest in shocking you, I just think John was a dick.

But in my opinion, he's overrated as an individual musician (and lyricist). I love some of his work and am a fan. But he's just an interesting rock n roller to me.

I agree that people tend to overrate him. I think he's more remembered for being a martyr than he is a musician.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: pixletwin on July 11, 2014, 12:18:09 PM
"apparently" had an affair with Brian.... Unconfirmed-never will be, did not happen!

That's beside the point, really.

Some folks in here apparently take the Goldman biography (a rotten piece of writing) as if it's the bible.

I've never heard of this book, let alone read it.

Some folks here apparently think that because they're young whippersnappers they can "shock" all the old -timers (+Gabo)

I have no interest in shocking you, I just think John was a dick.

But in my opinion, he's overrated as an individual musician (and lyricist). I love some of his work and am a fan. But he's just an interesting rock n roller to me.

I agree that people tend to overrate him. I think he's more remembered for being a martyr than he is a musician.

1) Then you are basing all your stories on 3rd and 4th hand accounts. Ok then.
2)  John was a dick.
3) You think he is overrated more for being shot to death rather than having been the nucleus and founder of the biggest rock group in history?
4) You are very young.



Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: alf wiedersehen on July 11, 2014, 12:38:47 PM
1) Then you are basing all your stories on 3rd and 4th hand accounts. Ok then.

Aren't we all? It's not like any of us have actually talked to John, his wives, Paul, George, Ringo, or Brian Epstein.

2)  John was a dick.

Right...

3) You think he is overrated more for being shot to death rather than having been the nucleus and founder of the biggest rock group in history?

Yes, he died a tragic death while promoting peace. He's become a symbol and a martyr for the cause.
When he died, his album that was getting tepid reviews won album of the year.

4) You are very young.

Entirely irrelevant. Please don't cite age as if that somehow means anything.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: pixletwin on July 11, 2014, 12:39:27 PM
Age means a lot when it comes to forming opinions. I apologize if this unsettles you.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: alf wiedersehen on July 11, 2014, 01:02:21 PM
Apology accepted.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: pixletwin on July 11, 2014, 01:25:33 PM
Apology accepted.

 ;D


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on July 11, 2014, 02:16:19 PM
It's not like any of us have actually talked to John, his wives, Paul, George, Ringo, or Brian Epstein.

No, but those who have tend to de-legitimize several of the points that you have made about John in this thread.

Take for example the claim that he "beat his wife." The latest magnum opus on The Beatles written by the great Mark Lewisohn puts it this way:

Quote
December 1959 was John and Cyn's first Christmas together, and they'd only just made it one piece. Though regularly unfaithful himself, John was manically insecure about Cyn's fidelity and one day became so enraged in his belief that she'd considered another man, he slapped her. The exact circumstances have varied with retelling, but it seems John heard Cyn had danced with a man at a party; the next day he followed her into the ladies' toilet at college, accused her, and lashed out. Cyn was found crying by her best friend  Phyllis McKenzie - 'Apparently, he'd slapped her face. I though, 'He's a right bastard.' And that did worry me. He could be very cruel.
...
Cyn was encouraged by friends to break off the relationship and did for a short while - until John apologized and swore he'd never strike her again. In 2005 she wrote, 'John was true to his word, he was never again physically violent to me.'

Quoted from The Beatles: All These Years, Tune In, 2013. Page 241.

Now, this quotation certainly does not portray Lennon in the best light. There is, of course, no excuse for Lennon was abusive this one time to Cynthia before their marriage. Nevertheless, as this quotation suggests, there is no evidence to support the claim that Lennon beat his wife. Not only is the claim a false one but it suggest something worse than the admittedly unfortunate reality of what was really the case.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: pixletwin on July 11, 2014, 02:18:30 PM
"I use to be cruel to my woman I beat here and kept her apart from the things that she loved.
Man I was mean, but I'm changing my scene and I'm doing the best that I can."

I think the cruelest story about John that really effected how I looked at him was when Julian was playing with a friend when John had invited them for a visit in sometime in 1979. Julian was quite a sensitive child and it took a lot for him to come out of his shell (especially if John was around).

Anyways, Julian and others were making Mickey Mouse pancakes, having fun and Julian giggled. For whatever reason, John slammed into Julian verbally telling him he had horrible laugh and he never wanted to hear him laugh like that again. Apparently even after that, John continued to verbally abuse him until Julian retreated to his bedroom in tears. Years later he said he took him a long time to laugh out loud without hearing those words in his head.

So yeah, Lennon could be a really terrible person. Nothing particularly new there.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on July 11, 2014, 02:21:08 PM
"I use to be cruel to my woman I beat here and kept her apart from the things that she loved.
Man I was mean, but I'm changing my scene and I'm doing the best that I can."

Yep - the fact is that we know much of the brutal truths about John because John himself told us about them.

The great Lewisohn book by the way insinuates that in that first line he was probably thinking more about his earlier girlfriend Thelma Pickles than he was about Cynthia.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: alf wiedersehen on July 11, 2014, 02:22:55 PM
"I use to be cruel to my woman I beat here and kept her apart from the things that she loved.
Man I was mean, but I'm changing my scene and I'm doing the best that I can."

Yep - the fact is that we know much of the brutal truths about John because John himself told us about them.

Pretty sure those are Paul lyrics.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on July 11, 2014, 02:24:06 PM
"I use to be cruel to my woman I beat here and kept her apart from the things that she loved.
Man I was mean, but I'm changing my scene and I'm doing the best that I can."

Yep - the fact is that we know much of the brutal truths about John because John himself told us about them.

Pretty sure those are Paul lyrics.

That would be incorrect. Most are in agreement that Lennon wrote that part of Getting Better.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: the captain on July 11, 2014, 02:24:44 PM
Age means a lot when it comes to forming opinions. I apologize if this unsettles you.

I think it factors in, but it's certainly not enough to define a person or dismiss an opinion. I say that as someone who a) used to be the young guy with strong opinions in everything (god, I miss being the young guy...), and b) recognizing as I get older that old people are actually just as stupid as young ones. Just older.

That said, I agree with your point, in a way. Experience does change one's outlook. Not always for the better, not always for the worse. But it affects things.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: the captain on July 11, 2014, 02:25:57 PM
"I use to be cruel to my woman I beat here and kept her apart from the things that she loved.
Man I was mean, but I'm changing my scene and I'm doing the best that I can."

Yep - the fact is that we know much of the brutal truths about John because John himself told us about them.

Pretty sure those are Paul lyrics.

That would be incorrect. Most are in agreement that Lennon wrote that part of Getting Better.
Those are great lyrics, though, whoever wrote them.



Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: pixletwin on July 11, 2014, 02:27:20 PM
"I use to be cruel to my woman I beat here and kept her apart from the things that she loved.
Man I was mean, but I'm changing my scene and I'm doing the best that I can."

Yep - the fact is that we know much of the brutal truths about John because John himself told us about them.

Pretty sure those are Paul lyrics.

You would be wrong. 100%


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Gabo on July 11, 2014, 02:31:52 PM
Lennon was a brilliant, brilliant melodist. Better than Wilson in that regard because his songs actually feel like they have a bit more meat to them. They are super-melodic but also rock, are also anthemic, are also bittersweet. And poetic.

Most of Wilson's music is pure ear candy. Lennon's music went far above that. Not just because his lyrics were great. He just wrote really interesting music.

He was also versatile as f***. He wrote "Good Night"!


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Moon Dawg on July 11, 2014, 02:32:47 PM
He beat his wife.
That's a strong case for being an asshole.

 How do you know this? From Albert Goldman??


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: alf wiedersehen on July 11, 2014, 02:33:58 PM
I regret ever posting here


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: the captain on July 11, 2014, 02:34:12 PM
Lennon was a brilliant, brilliant melodist. Better than Wilson in that regard because his songs actually feel like they have a bit more meat to them. They are super-melodic but also rock, are also anthemic, are also bittersweet. And poetic.

Most of Wilson's music is pure ear candy. Lennon's music went far above that. Not just because his lyrics were great. He just wrote really interesting music.

He was also versatile as f***. He wrote "Good Night"!

If I'm remembering our previous interactions correctly (especially regarding of Montreal favorites), I think you and I have a bizarre musical appreciation thing going on where despite liking a lot of the same bands or people in general, it seems we like the exact opposite things from them. Weird and fun. I could be wrong. I could be drunk. (I am drunk.)


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Moon Dawg on July 11, 2014, 02:36:23 PM
I regret ever posting here

  I second that.   :lol


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: pixletwin on July 11, 2014, 02:38:28 PM
I regret ever posting here

This is where you are showing your age.

Don't be offended. It's not my intent. But it is a well known fact that Lennon wrote those lyrics. Also it's a discussion of opposing viewpoints. It's that dissonance which creates a good discussion. So don't let it get under your skin.

I do like your new name. It would be cooler and funnier if "Wrong" was lower case, like so: "wrong. %100"


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: the captain on July 11, 2014, 02:44:05 PM
Could be that multiple people posting the same correction comes across as piling on. (In reality a lot of people just don't read all the previous posts, and some people--not you, pixeltwin!--are fucking dicks who like making sure they actually do pile on in their unending shows of wisdom. "It was Paul." "It was Paul!" "Paul wrote that!" "I was gonna say, that was Paul!")

Looks like the lowercase name suggestion took hold.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: alf wiedersehen on July 11, 2014, 02:46:27 PM
Could be that multiple people posting the same correction comes across as piling on. (In reality a lot of people just don't read all the previous posts, and some people--not you, pixeltwin!--are fucking dicks who like making sure they actually do pile on in their unending shows of wisdom. "It was Paul." "It was Paul!" "Paul wrote that!" "I was gonna say, that was Paul!")

Looks like the lowercase name suggestion took hold.


Yeah, I was sort of getting it from all angles.

I tried out the lowercase name, but I think I prefer the capital.

On a related note, my Criterion blu-ray of A Hard Day's Night arrived today.
Haven't seen it yet, so I am looking forward to it.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Gabo on July 11, 2014, 02:51:11 PM
I really dislike A Hard Day's Night the film for some reason


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: bluesno1fann on July 11, 2014, 07:10:29 PM
"I use to be cruel to my woman I beat here and kept her apart from the things that she loved.
Man I was mean, but I'm changing my scene and I'm doing the best that I can."

I think the cruelest story about John that really effected how I looked at him was when Julian was playing with a friend when John had invited them for a visit in sometime in 1979. Julian was quite a sensitive child and it took a lot for him to come out of his shell (especially if John was around).

Anyways, Julian and others were making Mickey Mouse pancakes, having fun and Julian giggled. For whatever reason, John slammed into Julian verbally telling him he had horrible laugh and he never wanted to hear him laugh like that again. Apparently even after that, John continued to verbally abuse him until Julian retreated to his bedroom in tears. Years later he said he took him a long time to laugh out loud without hearing those words in his head.

So yeah, Lennon could be a really terrible person. Nothing particularly new there.

Yeah, that story disgusted me more than any other by Lennon. Except that I though it happened around 1975. Oh well...
This article was quite interesting:
http://listverse.com/2012/05/12/top-10-unpleasant-facts-about-john-lennon/

But anyway, on a lighter note...
Anyone else don't mind the album Sometime In New York City?


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: rogerlancelot on July 11, 2014, 08:41:54 PM
"I use to be cruel to my woman I beat here and kept her apart from the things that she loved.
Man I was mean, but I'm changing my scene and I'm doing the best that I can."

I think the cruelest story about John that really effected how I looked at him was when Julian was playing with a friend when John had invited them for a visit in sometime in 1979. Julian was quite a sensitive child and it took a lot for him to come out of his shell (especially if John was around).

Anyways, Julian and others were making Mickey Mouse pancakes, having fun and Julian giggled. For whatever reason, John slammed into Julian verbally telling him he had horrible laugh and he never wanted to hear him laugh like that again. Apparently even after that, John continued to verbally abuse him until Julian retreated to his bedroom in tears. Years later he said he took him a long time to laugh out loud without hearing those words in his head.

So yeah, Lennon could be a really terrible person. Nothing particularly new there.

Yeah, that story disgusted me more than any other by Lennon. Except that I though it happened around 1975. Oh well...
This article was quite interesting:
http://listverse.com/2012/05/12/top-10-unpleasant-facts-about-john-lennon/

But anyway, on a lighter note...
Anyone else don't mind the album Sometime In New York City?

Sounds like mud to me. Phil Spector was losing his touch there. I used to listen to the bonus live lp more than the studio album. I really do love the next lp Mind Games much more, especially "Out Of The Blue" (aka "Out The Blue") with the opening finger picking chord progression and melody on top. One of his finest moments.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Mr. Verlander on July 13, 2014, 05:03:21 AM
To be fair, all of The Beatles could be assholes. I admit, they're my favorite band, although I don't put them up on pedestals, which ends up being the problem with most fans. John Lennon once said something like 'You have to be a bastard to make it, and The Beatles were the four biggest bastards on earth'. Which may be a bit extreme, although you get the point. I mean hell, after they broke up, George Harrison got caught in bed with Ringo's wife Maureen-while he was still married to Patti Boyd. So yeah, they all could be dicks.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: the captain on July 13, 2014, 07:48:23 AM
Coincidentally I came across the below James Loeffler's review of Michael Haas's "Forbidden Music: The Jewish Composers Banned by the Nazis" as found in at The New Republic website.

Quote
We reflexively resist acknowledging how much great music comes from bad men. Even when we do confront the moral failings and petty biases of great composers, our instinct is to quarantine the music itself. For, of all the arts, music most retains its hallowed aura of transcendence. In the pure realm of abstract sound, we often imagine, particularities and prejudices fall away to reveal a universal human condition.
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/118331/forbidden-music-michael-haas-reviewed-james-loeffler

The specific topic of the review (and apparently book) is anti-Semitism in music and among Germans in particular in the latter portion of the 1800s through WWII. But the above quote seemed relevant to some of what has been said in this thread. The question as I understand it posed in this review is, can music exist outside of race, nationality, politics, etc., or is it intrinsically linked (and therefore can the composer himself be separated from his work)? The separation is explained in that same review here:

Quote
For Wagner’s ideas coincided with the mid-nineteenth-century split of German music into two factions. The Old School (defined stylistically, not chronologically) centered on Brahms and his followers. Though by no means artistic conservatives, they favored a Mendelssohnian ideal of music as an autonomous realm of beauty. Their rivals in the New German School of Wagner and Liszt (who also authored an anti-Semitic tract of his own) argued for the ideal of nationalism. Music’s fate was to serve as a vessel for political ideas, cultural forms, and social functions.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Amanda Hart on July 14, 2014, 07:56:18 AM
If you choose to dislike a creation just because the creator acts like a dick, you would like no music and very, very little comedy.

Lennon's solo stuff gets to be really hit or miss for me, but his talent for both melody and lyrics are undeniable.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: alf wiedersehen on July 14, 2014, 11:00:04 AM
If you guys are fans of melodies, you should really check out this guy named Paul McCartney.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: pixletwin on July 14, 2014, 11:07:27 AM
If you choose to dislike a creation just because the creator acts like a dick, you would like no music and very, very little comedy.

Lennon's solo stuff gets to be really hit or miss for me, but his talent for both melody and lyrics are undeniable.

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


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: the captain on July 14, 2014, 11:32:02 AM
If you guys are fans of melodies, you should really check out this guy named Paul McCartney.

Paul who?

Actually as would surprise nobody who has heard my songs or knows my taste, Paul is far and away my choice for greatest Beatle.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Gertie J. on July 14, 2014, 11:41:57 AM
pauls songs lack uniqueness that johns have. he has more filler than anyone whose name is not rod stewart.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: alf wiedersehen on July 14, 2014, 11:47:31 AM
If you guys are fans of melodies, you should really check out this guy named Paul McCartney.

Paul who?

Actually as would surprise nobody who has heard my songs or knows my taste, Paul is far and away my choice for greatest Beatle.

Mine, too.
When first becoming a Beatles fan, I for some reason decided that John Lennon was my favorite. However, when I started to listen to more and more of their music and became an enormous fan, my favorite (and choice for best) Beatle turned into Paul McCartney. George is #2.


Title: Never a Dull Moment
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 14, 2014, 11:51:28 AM
.



Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: the captain on July 14, 2014, 12:16:36 PM
pauls songs lack uniqueness that johns have. he has more filler than anyone whose name is not rod stewart.

I'd say the exact opposite on both counts.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Gabo on July 14, 2014, 01:24:51 PM
I like Lennon more than McCartney because:

1. I'd rather hear his voice than McCartney's. I just like it more.
2. I like his peace songs and anthems a lot. He was definitely a better writer of "singles" than McCartney. McCartney's singles were often his most throwaway work (Lady Madonna, Hello Goodbye, etc.), the opposite is true for Lennon. Rain should have gotten the A-side, as well as I Am The Walrus, much better tracks.
3. Lennon's songs are much edgier. I like that. He wasn't afraid to express himself through songs, while McCartney was more interested in making pastiches. I like both approaches, but Lennon's music just sounds like it comes from the heart more. McCartney was more conservative with his forms. I also think Lennon's attempts at nonsense lyrics were much better. In His Own Write proves he was a great literary talent.

Also Lennon just looked so damn cool. The glasses and all that. And his pretty Japanese wife. His life was also more interesting overall, not even counting his murder. He changed a lot over the years and did a lot of things unrelated to music. 



Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Moon Dawg on July 14, 2014, 01:38:13 PM
 John was my first favorite of The Beatles but over the years I became a Paul backer as (to me) McCartney is clearly the more interesting musician. I still feel that John was the better lyricist, and yes he did have an edge. But Paul's music does more for more.

 John's solo stuff is hit and miss. I agree with the earlier comment about his production skills as well.

 Consider PLASTIC ONO BAND and IMAGINE. Although both are classics, what in the world happened to Lennon's sense of humor? And the God complex was a bit much. John was close to a great album with WALLS & BRIDGES but it needed maybe 2 more really good songs instead of "Ya Ya."


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Gabo on July 14, 2014, 01:44:16 PM
Paul comes off as less interesting to me because it seemed clear he wanted to continuously remake Abbey Road and Sgt. Pepper throughout his career. All his music feels so tacky, superproduced. Besides the inconsequential Smiley Smiles of his career, McCartney 1 and 2.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 14, 2014, 01:52:14 PM
.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 14, 2014, 01:53:14 PM
.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: pixletwin on July 14, 2014, 01:58:23 PM
On Beatles albums I prefer John's work. Paul is second and George is third.

For solo stuff I would still rank Lennon at #1, with George at #2, and Paul at #3. I liked Lennon's work the best for the longest time. He was just a more interesting singer/personality. His subject matters resonated more with me. I have found as I grow older that Paul's work and George's work (especially) has been increasing in favor, while my interest in Lennon has diminished somewhat. I would still put Lennon as #1 though.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 14, 2014, 01:59:08 PM
.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 14, 2014, 02:06:31 PM
.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Gabo on July 14, 2014, 02:10:20 PM
More listenable, but more affecting? Nah. McCartney solo is all showmanship. It's not even great pop.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 14, 2014, 02:16:55 PM
.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Gabo on July 14, 2014, 02:37:31 PM
I'm sick of this Lennon vs. McCartney crap. I love them both. Of course most people on a Beach Boys forum are going to like McCartney more than Lennon... I started thread just to discuss how cool Lennon was. He's the man.  :afro


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: the captain on July 14, 2014, 02:46:57 PM
Of course most people on a Beach Boys forum are going to like McCartney more than Lennon...

I guess I didn't tally it up, but I think this thread shows the opposite. Seems more Lennon backers.

But like you, I like them both. And obviously it's not necessary to choose one any more than it is necessary to choose one band over another. There's plenty of time to listen to and love plenty of things. At least hopefully there's plenty of time (I guess one never knows).


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 14, 2014, 02:49:28 PM
.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 14, 2014, 02:51:23 PM
.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: alf wiedersehen on July 14, 2014, 04:12:22 PM
Well, we clearly have different opinions on this (i.e. Pixletwin and Gabo being wrong), so I suppose we'll have to move on.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: pixletwin on July 14, 2014, 04:16:35 PM
Well, we clearly have different opinions on this (i.e. Pixletwin and Gabo being wrong), so I suppose we'll have to move on.

Not sure if this is said jokingly or if you really believe that (I have seen stranger and stupider things on this site).  :lol


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Gabo on July 14, 2014, 04:24:43 PM
Another point about Lennon:

He also wrote almost all of the band's early hits until "Yesterday" and dominated the group until Revolver. He wrote 10 out of the 13 songs on A Hard Day's Night (my favorite early Beatles album). He was the most dominant personality in the band, and probably their most prolific writer even close to the end.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: bluesno1fann on July 14, 2014, 04:28:35 PM
Have to admit I'm not really a fan of his work during the Lost Weekend, with very few exceptions.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: alf wiedersehen on July 14, 2014, 04:31:57 PM
and probably their most prolific writer even close to the end.

No, Paul overtook him from Revolver onwards.
Perhaps you think Paul is trying to recreate Sgt. Peppers and Abbey Road because he's the most dominant force on those albums? Those records sound like his music because those records are his music.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Niko on July 14, 2014, 04:32:51 PM
The best Beatles music came out from Rubber Soul to Abbey Road. Those 5 albums and 1 double EP are some of the best ever made (and the greatest), and it is amazing to think how consistently excellent they were. For me, there are not many albums better than White Album or Abbey Road, which are the sum of the parts of each member. Even Ringo getting in there with Goodnight. I like the McCartney/George songs in there more than I like the Lennon ones, even if sh*t like Me and My Monkey does rock the house down. Lennon was always the rocker of the group.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on July 14, 2014, 04:52:58 PM
I have a couple of thoughts here.

To me, Lennon and McCartney are two of the greatest musicians of all time and to me talking about which one is better is to miss the point that there were few people (in my view) better than either of them.

However, I do have the view that after 1965, John had burned out and never quite recovered. In a roughly two year span, Lennon wrote or contributed a sizeable amount to: I Want to Hold Your Hand, This Boy, A Hard Day's Night, I Should Have Known Better, If I Fell,  I'll Cry Instead, You Can't Do That, I'll Be Back, I Feel Fine, I'm a Loser, Baby's in Black, I Don't Want to Spoil the Party, Ticket to Ride, Help!, You've Got To Hide Your Love Away, You're Gonna Lose That Girl, Day Tripper, Norwegian Wood, Nowhere Man, The Word, Girl, and In My Life. This is two years of creativity that I think is unparalleled in the history of pop music.

After 1965, he never quite captured that same magic. This is perhaps for several reasons. One might be his increased use of drugs. Another might be his ever growing disillusionment with the mainstream. But another important one is that he was probably quite seriously burned out after those years of creativity. And the simple fact of the matter is is that no one really captured that again so why is it so shocking that Lennon could keep up that pace of creativity.

This is not to say that he didn't still have incredible songs in him. 1967 was a fantastic year for Lennon when he wrote some of his all-time best material. Yet, at the same time, he didn't write nearly as much as he did during those peak years. And he did struggle with writing bona fide hit single material, even though he seemed to care about writing hit A-sides. Again, he could still do it, though one should wonder how far The Ballad of John and Yoko (which I think is a great song) would have gone up the charts had it been released as a solo Lennon track in 1971.

Also, I have to say that I don't particularly think that I value Lennon highly because his songs are more "real" -- I hear plenty of amateurs on youtube talking about personal stuff in their music and the songs are completely lousy. I think this all stems from the fact that we strive for an objective way to evaluate music and one way people do this is to so the more real it is, the better it is. It's harder (but more realistic, I think) to explain that there is just some ineffable quality that makes me enjoy a song. Where Lennon exceeds as a lyricist is his ability to express the kinds of things that people experience but would have never been able to articulate. At least, that's what he does for me. A song like In My Life, for example, becomes more and more relevant every day for me.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Gabo on July 14, 2014, 04:57:56 PM
In a roughly two year span, Lennon wrote or contributed a sizeable amount to: I Want to Hold Your Hand, This Boy, A Hard Day's Night, I Should Have Known Better, If I Fell,  I'll Cry Instead, You Can't Do That, I'll Be Back, I Feel Fine, I'm a Loser, Baby's in Black, I Don't Want to Spoil the Party, Ticket to Ride, Help!, You've Got To Hide Your Love Away, You're Gonna Lose That Girl, Day Tripper, Norwegian Wood, Nowhere Man, The Word, Girl, and In My Life. This is two years of creativity that I think is unparalleled in the history of pop music.

Lennon was responsible for the band's early success. His vocals and songwriting were at the forefront.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on July 14, 2014, 05:03:28 PM
In a roughly two year span, Lennon wrote or contributed a sizeable amount to: I Want to Hold Your Hand, This Boy, A Hard Day's Night, I Should Have Known Better, If I Fell,  I'll Cry Instead, You Can't Do That, I'll Be Back, I Feel Fine, I'm a Loser, Baby's in Black, I Don't Want to Spoil the Party, Ticket to Ride, Help!, You've Got To Hide Your Love Away, You're Gonna Lose That Girl, Day Tripper, Norwegian Wood, Nowhere Man, The Word, Girl, and In My Life. This is two years of creativity that I think is unparalleled in the history of pop music.

Lennon was responsible for the band's early success. His vocals and songwriting dominated the band.

He was the leader, unquestionably, but not solely responsible for their success. He played a big role in it, but the band's strength was always that they were more than the sum of their parts. They were a group who played incredibly well together and they developed their sound together. Lennon wasn't really responsible for The Beatles sound - that was something that mostly Lennon, McCartney, and Harrison developed together in Hamburg and then Ringo added a new element too when he was brought on board. This is significant because really no one really sounded like The Beatles when they dropped on the scene.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: pixletwin on July 14, 2014, 05:32:43 PM
Rockandroll gets it right.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Ron on July 14, 2014, 06:53:22 PM
I think the more you listen, the more you realize that everybody in the band was instrumental in their success.  It's the same exact scenario with Nirvana.  It's easy to say Kurt was the genius, blah blah and I thought that too when I was a kid, but once you figure out how fucking BAD ASS Dave Grohl's drums were and what it added, and when you listen to the basslines on each song... you realize that it wasn't just the Kurt show, they were all talented and kicking ass.

Same thing with the Beatles.  Yes John was brilliant and was great at what he did, but check out Paul's bass on "I Saw Her Standing There".  Completely indispensable part of the band.  Ringo is so underrated it's criminal, everybody's been over that a million times.  Ringo was the guy they called in because they needed the best drummer they knew of.  George's talent has been well described over the years as well.


Another thing that doesn't get discussed much is that they were a Boy Band.  Much of their success was because of their legions of young female fans, who all had a seperate Beatle that they were in love with.  Ask any woman over 60 and she'll explain it to you.  Paul was the pretty one, John was the bad boy, Ringo was the goofy one, George was the mysterious one, etc.  Again, each Beatle played their part. 


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Ron on July 14, 2014, 06:55:05 PM
Solo I'd have to give it to Paul, which is a little unfair to John since he only had 10 years.  To my ears, John seemed to be returning to his pop brilliance around the time he died, the last album had some great pop songs on it, which is what he was best at.  In the 80's he probably would have recorded some great sh*t but we'll never know. 

I was blown away the first time I heard the Wings double greatest hits album.  Fantastic music. 


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: SMiLE-addict on July 14, 2014, 07:57:36 PM
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.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 14, 2014, 09:58:01 PM
.


Title: Sorry 96%-er,I wunt sure if you wer joking,that's become clear (sad smiley*how?)
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 14, 2014, 11:11:57 PM
.


Title: Tryin' to get on board wih earnest appreesh of Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 14, 2014, 11:40:23 PM
.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 15, 2014, 12:02:30 AM
.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Lonely Summer on July 15, 2014, 12:34:53 AM
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.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on July 15, 2014, 11:39:15 AM
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).


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Amanda Hart on July 15, 2014, 12:24:43 PM

My opinion: Lennon was a great songwriter throughout the 70's. His problem was that he was a terrible producer. TER-RIB-BLE.  :lol
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.



Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Ron on July 15, 2014, 04:39:48 PM
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. 


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Lonely Summer on July 16, 2014, 12:33:35 AM
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.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Gabo on July 16, 2014, 10:47:05 PM
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?


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Lonely Summer on July 16, 2014, 11:31:35 PM
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.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: pixletwin on July 17, 2014, 07:42:26 AM
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


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: beatnickle on July 17, 2014, 08:47:09 AM
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.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on July 17, 2014, 09:07:36 AM
"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.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: pixletwin on July 17, 2014, 09:09:33 AM
McCartney can be deep. He just doesn't wear it on his sleeve.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on July 17, 2014, 09:12:51 AM
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.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: guitarfool2002 on July 17, 2014, 11:11:22 AM
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.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: pixletwin on July 17, 2014, 11:16:43 AM
What a great post guitarfool. Thanks for sharing.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: beatnickle on July 17, 2014, 12:23:33 PM
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.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Ron on July 17, 2014, 09:15:18 PM
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"...


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Ron on July 17, 2014, 09:17:43 PM
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"


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Lonely Summer on July 17, 2014, 11:36:54 PM
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.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: beatnickle on July 18, 2014, 06:27:45 AM
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"


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on July 18, 2014, 10:46:54 AM
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.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: alf wiedersehen on July 18, 2014, 11:05:31 AM
In the words of the great Harry Nilsson:

"You see what you want to see, and you hear what you want to hear."


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on July 18, 2014, 11:15:40 AM
Dig.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Ron on July 20, 2014, 12:40:15 AM
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"

George would roll over in his grave if he thought people were calling him "Deep"... it's completely against everything he stood for spiritually, he would never claim to know more than someone else or that his voice was more 'deep' or introspective than anyone's, least of which his good friend Paul McCartney. 

I posted a clip above of what John thought of being called "Deep".  He said if he had a good sh*t he's write a song about it.  He literally said that, on the clip above.  He said his songs are just words that sound cool, everybody does it, he just threw some words together that rhymed. 

Paul made a career out of laughing at himself. 

I'm not saying any of them were pretentious, in fact i'm saying that they went out of their way to NOT call themselves 'deep' because they recognized it would seem pretentious.  Even John, who walked that line closer than any of them often ridiculed it (Glass Onion) or apologized for it "You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one" etc. etc.

To have a conversation about which one of them was more 'deep' is pretty juvenile in my opinion.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: halblaineisgood on July 20, 2014, 02:55:13 AM
.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: beatnickle on July 20, 2014, 05:20:18 AM
 Mon Dieu ! I am not juvenile, sir. I am deep. My second will call upon your second.  :jedi


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: danieljack on July 20, 2014, 10:49:32 PM
John Lennon was a born Revolutionary


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on July 30, 2014, 05:41:33 AM
Musically, I have good & bad thing to say about John:

1. "Mother" on Anthology Ascot is superior to the POB version. Stronger vocal & better, edgier arrangement. The last seconds are great, dig the guitar picking.
2. He managed to do both the most atypical AND worst cover of "Be My Baby". Some really interesting moments are ruined by pedestrian vocal acrobatics, needless yelling & the regular vocal is too mawkish. But least we have "Only You" (Ringo cut another take to the same backing track, if I'm right).

That being said, my favorite "rare" song by any ex-Beatle is "Yvonne". Marvellous tune, with the mouth electric guitar solo to boot.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Gabo on August 02, 2014, 04:19:17 PM
John Lennon was the best boy who ever lived.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Moon Dawg on August 03, 2014, 03:09:41 PM
  I recently viewed a YouTube clip of Lennon with Simon & Garfunkel at the 1975 Grammy Show. If concurrent Mike Love had been present and behaved as John did - California style - a lot of people would have said "Mike Love is a jerk."

 It's time to face the brutal truth: John was not especially cool, post 1969. In fact, he was at times insufferable, with witless politics to boot. I'm not blaming Yoko either.

  It doesn't make me happy to say negative things about John, but his elevation to near sainthood could use a counterpoint.

  BTW- John's vocal on "All I've Got to Do" (WITH THE BEATLES) is a soulful and relatively unsung performance. Good stuff.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Gabo on August 03, 2014, 06:36:01 PM
I love that performance, as well as Not A Second Time, possibly one of the very best early Beatles songs.


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on August 07, 2014, 09:27:06 PM
  It's time to face the brutal truth: John was not especially cool, post 1969. In fact, he was at times insufferable, with witless politics to boot. I'm not blaming Yoko either.

  BTW- John's vocal on "All I've Got to Do" (WITH THE BEATLES) is a soulful and relatively unsung performance. Good stuff.
Affirmative nod on your 1st point. As someone who's totally indifferent about politics, I never cared for this side of John. Boring figure.
Soulful, soulless, that's one of my least favorite early Beatles songs. Too slow.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Ron on August 30, 2014, 11:15:20 PM
I was reading John's Playboy interview the other night, and the whole thing with Paul really kind of hit me.  Here's how I understand the whole situation:

Around 74 or so, John plays a live show with Elton John @ Madison Square Garden.  He was seperated from Yoko at the time.

Paul & Linda went to see Yoko, and told her that John wanted to see her and missed her, and asked her to the show.  she agreed to go.  Meanwhile they hadn't talked to John at all.  Yoko shows up at the show, talks to John, they go out to Dinner afterwards and end up back together.  in other words, Paul's meddling basically got John & Yoko back together again.

John moves back in with Yoko, they have a child.  Paul keeps "showing up at the door with a Guitar" and for a period of time John & Paul (and Linda, and Yoko) kind of hang out in John's apartment on some nights... including 1 night when they actually see the SNL publicity stunt where Lorne Michaels offers them 3200 bucks to appear on the show.  John & Paul almost go down to the studio that night, but decide against it because they're too tired.  Paul later recalled that it was actually the week later, and John explained to him that last week he saw Lorne make the offer, and they should go down, but they both decided it'd be too much work.

One night Paul shows up and John tells him to call next time, he's busy raising a baby and he can't just drop by like the old days.  Apparently that's the last time John sees Paul in person... the rest of the interview suggests the relationship is strained... two months after the interview John's murdered.

It's kind of tough reading it and hearing him be so hard on Paul, knowing that John died a short while later and that's how the whole thing ended.  He's also pretty pissed off at George.  


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Ron on August 30, 2014, 11:28:21 PM
Yoko: "I look for something else in men - something that is tender and weak and I feel like I want to help"

John: "Yeah, and I'm the lucky cripple she chose!"

The banter between John & Yoko in that interview is hilarious. 


Title: Re: John Lennon
Post by: Rocky Raccoon on September 09, 2014, 12:27:39 AM
John was not especially cool, post 1969. In fact, he was at times insufferable, with witless politics to boot. I'm not blaming Yoko either.

I'm not sure I'd call his politics "witless" but he probably wasn't as politically minded as he may have seemed to be.  I think that was more Yoko's influence and John just seemed more prominent because he was more famous.  I do think they were both pretty cool though, I still think Yoko is pretty awesome even if her art borders on ridiculously pretentious (or is it pretentiously ridiculous?) at times, she's an intriguing personality to say the least.

As for whether or not Lennon was "cool," I suppose he wasn't cool in the conventional sense but I don't think he was trying to be.  This is a guy who was writing some of the most personal lyrics of any other songwriter, turning his very real personal struggles and insecurities into pop songs.  That's what has made him such a cult figure, why his death still resonates, why people still idolize him.  Because he wasn't afraid to be uncool, that's what made him cool and people could relate to him through his songs.  At least that's how I see it.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Ron on September 10, 2014, 04:11:49 PM
He definately wasn't trying to be cool, if you read his playboy interview he basically says over and over again he didn't care what anybody thought of him and didn't like people idolizing celebrities.  He seemed very impressionable, you can see the drastic effect Yoko had on him... if not her it would have been somebody else, though. 


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: pixletwin on September 10, 2014, 06:11:06 PM
That is the irony of the man. He didn't want people to idolize him or anyone yet his whole life he bounced from one subject if idol worship to another.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Ron on September 11, 2014, 10:29:02 PM
Yeah!  I'm amazed at how Yoko calls him out on it in that interview too... then John does the same to her.  They must have had a really interesting relationship, it's like they argued politely with each other.

She straight out tells him that he has 'daddies' that he follows around, then John theorizes that the Beatles were a 'daddie' that he doesn't need, then she calls him out about how he went to primal scream therapy from some long forgotten guru, and he calls her out for going to some religious event, and all the while he keeps telling the interviewer about how he doesn't want to hang out with guys anymore and just wants to hang out with Yoko.  

I hate pretentiousness but I never got that from him, he always seems like he realized how full of sh*t he was on everything.  Fascinating read.  It's hard to think he's pretentious when he keeps saying in every other breath that nobody should listen to him just because he's a celebrity.  

At the same time though, when you see him in that interview at nearly 40 and he is still arguing and fighting with pretty much all of his past acquaintances (1 Ex wife, 1 abandoned child, 2 former band mates he's fighting with, etc.) and he still has vitriol to spew at them, it's really sad to think that's how he checked out.  I mean really, he was still pissed at Paul?  He doesn't just say he's angry with them, he takes pot shots at both of them that are completely uncalled for.  Then they both spent the next 30 years telling everybody how great he was...  I'd like to think that deep down inside he really did realize what great friends Paul & George both were to him.  You rarely get friends like that in a lifetime.  The way he ridicules George and basically says he was a hanger on, and how he looked down on George... and then to see how George acted about John after he died two months later, it's just sad and beautiful at the same time. 

The whole thing with Yoko is so fascinating too, because we don't know what was going on behind closed doors but hell I never got the feeling that she was trying to keep John away from Paul or George or whoever.  It was all in his own head, i'm sure it all went back to insecurity problems he had, he may have also been a flaming homophobe, his comments about how he didn't want to make a band with guys in it WTF?   

Then another interesting aspect: He was a damn fine musician!  Here's a guy who's reveled as a great songwriter, who is a great guitarist and in general just good at his craft, and he's basically got the attitude of 'well people shouldn't really get into the music it doesn't mean anything I'm just fucking around and I'm not important".... but at the same time he's promoting a record and trying to sell it.  Which is it, John?  The music's unimportant and doesn't mean anything, or the music's good enough that I should give you my hard earned money?

The guy was definitely a walking contradiction. 


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: pixletwin on September 12, 2014, 07:04:35 AM
Reading those interviews I didn't quite get the taste of bitterness as much as you seemed to. John was pretty hurt by the book George had just written which either downplayed or just plain ignored the help he gave him on certain songs.

Also the quote about George being a "hanger on" was specifically about the time period of 1957-60 when he saw George as little more than a kid who would follow him around everywhere... even on his dates. LOL There is no denying that in the beginning of their friendships with John, George and Paul were in awe of John and treated him like an idol. Anyways, that was the point John was making. At the end, I think the only Beatle he was on not-so-good terms with was George.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on September 12, 2014, 07:42:13 AM
I think John was constantly having a battle with himself over how to properly express his emotions. I think all of his life he had a real inner rage and he just didn't know how to properly control it - although to be honest, his music and his humour (when it was not cruel) was probably the best and healthiest expression of it. By the time he reached his late 30s, I think he was probably better at managing it, but I'm sure it was still difficult for him.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: pixletwin on September 12, 2014, 07:45:06 AM
I think John was constantly having a battle with himself over how to properly express his emotions. I think all of his life he had a real inner rage and he just didn't know how to properly control it - although to be honest, his music and his humour (when it was not cruel) was probably the best and healthiest expression of it. By the time he reached his late 30s, I think he was probably better at managing it, but I'm sure it was still difficult for him.

Spot on. What a great observation.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: SenorPotatoHead on September 14, 2014, 09:13:37 AM
Recently re-listened to a BBC interview John and Yoko gave on Dec 6th 1980.   Brought back the deep sadness of his murder, they both sounded so happy, exuberant and excited to be just where they were at that point and time.   


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Emily on March 22, 2016, 01:50:02 PM
John Lennon had the most beautiful of all qualities -  the will to reflect on himself, admit faults, and change.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Lonely Summer on March 23, 2016, 04:28:34 PM
Reading those interviews I didn't quite get the taste of bitterness as much as you seemed to. John was pretty hurt by the book George had just written which either downplayed or just plain ignored the help he gave him on certain songs.

Also the quote about George being a "hanger on" was specifically about the time period of 1957-60 when he saw George as little more than a kid who would follow him around everywhere... even on his dates. LOL There is no denying that in the beginning of their friendships with John, George and Paul were in awe of John and treated him like an idol. Anyways, that was the point John was making. At the end, I think the only Beatle he was on not-so-good terms with was George.
John was over sensitive. That book was not a proper biography; the focus of the book was the original handwritten lyric pages of the songs he wrote between 1964-1979. There is a small biography section, but John gets mentioned just as much as Paul.
I do find it amusing, though, how Paul has spent the last 30 years telling everyone that he and John had patched up their differences at the end, were great 'mates' again, when it appears that was far from the truth. And I do think Yoko had a lot to do with John being estranged from his former bandmates. During his lost weekend of 73-74, he was out connecting with all his friends - Paul, Ringo, Nilsson, Elton; as soon as he and Yoko got back together, he went into isolation. Sad.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Buckethead on March 29, 2018, 10:21:33 AM
I just can't get past John's virtual abandonment of Julian. That the boy learned guitar from his school janitor and actually had to purchase sentimental items from the JL estate is too sad. How can someone have an authentic "peace" and "love" persona under those circumstances? An interview George gave, I believe before he took ill, seemed to confirm what I sensed about John, that that was an image, that, yes, he could be sweet, but underneath was a really hardened, angry person.     


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: KDS on March 29, 2018, 10:29:41 AM
I just can't get past John's virtual abandonment of Julian. That the boy learned guitar from his school janitor and actually had to purchase sentimental items from the JL estate is too sad. How can someone have an authentic "peace" and "love" persona under those circumstances? An interview George gave, I believe before he took ill, seemed to confirm what I sensed about John, that that was an image, that, yes, he could be sweet, but underneath was a really hardened, angry person.     

All the more reason I live by the "worship the music, not the man" mantra.   There are so many talented.....for lack of a better term a$$holes over the course of music.  Lennon, Spector, Roger Waters, Ritchie Blackmore, etc etc. 


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Buckethead on March 29, 2018, 11:18:58 AM
I am in full agreement, KDS. My annoyance is with people who confuse the music with the person. For example, I'm sure that Dennis Wilson had wonderful  aspects to his  personality, but his well-documented  history with women in no way supports the persona indicated in much of his music. 


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: KDS on March 29, 2018, 11:39:49 AM
I am in full agreement, KDS. My annoyance is with people who confuse the music with the person. For example, I'm sure that Dennis Wilson had wonderful  aspects to his  personality, but his well-documented  history with women in no way supports the persona indicated in much of his music. 

Even Brian Wilson wasn't Father of the Year material, yet he's thought of as a saint. 


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Buckethead on March 29, 2018, 02:31:48 PM
True, KDS, by many people.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on March 29, 2018, 03:28:16 PM
John Lennon's music I think reflected all aspects of his personality. His music wasn't all love and peace, some of it displayed a great deal of anger, laziness, and jealousy. It also articulated his humour. I really don't buy into the argument that his music was hypocritical. I think all of that was part of his personality and I think most of the people who actually knew him recognized that.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Buckethead on March 29, 2018, 04:03:02 PM
Oh, I am not saying that John Lennon himself was hypocritical. My real issue, I think, is people in general deifying artists, putting them on a pedestal based on impressions gleaned (sometimes unevenly) from their work or public presentation of themselves. It's a tendency that human beings have, I suppose.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on March 29, 2018, 05:03:39 PM
John's solo material is definitely not to my taste. But it's got cool songs here & there, sure. I usually like cool songs, which got some coolness in arrangement, cool vocal tricks, bits, hooks et al.

I've got theory about such comments as "he sings it with much more soul", "I prefer his voice because it's soulful" etc. I gather that when people say it, they mean the other singers vocally fail due to lack of soul in their voices. Or, that they didn't try to bring soul to the table when they sang. But, & I didn't think about it before, isn't it just the fact everybody's blessed with this voice & that voice? I.e. there's singers who *do* bare their souls but it's just not in-your-face due to the timbre, the type of voice & factors alike? It sounds subdued but it could be they express it differently than, say, Dennis or John who people usually describe as "emotive" & "soulful". There's many colors & shapes of voices, so the bottom line would be it isn't that some singers lack soul, just the way they sing, they sing like that & to them, they may sing with soul, expressiveness but to us, it sounds like they don't convey what they sing "convincingly" (it's not the right word but the right word escapes me, excuse it).

2 cents.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on March 29, 2018, 05:18:27 PM
Oh, I am not saying that John Lennon himself was hypocritical. My real issue, I think, is people in general deifying artists, putting them on a pedestal based on impressions gleaned (sometimes unevenly) from their work or public presentation of themselves. It's a tendency that human beings have, I suppose.

Yes, I always find it a bit odd that the Lennon that a lot people seem to remember is the one from a very brief period in his life: 1967-1971. Granted those 5 years were a significant part of his brief 40, but there were still so many facets of his ever-changing personality.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: KDS on March 30, 2018, 05:43:10 AM
John's solo material is definitely not to my taste. But it's got cool songs here & there, sure. I usually like cool songs, which got some coolness in arrangement, cool vocal tricks, bits, hooks et al.

I've got theory about such comments as "he sings it with much more soul", "I prefer his voice because it's soulful" etc. I gather that when people say it, they mean the other singers vocally fail due to lack of soul in their voices. Or, that they didn't try to bring soul to the table when they sang. But, & I didn't think about it before, isn't it just the fact everybody's blessed with this voice & that voice? I.e. there's singers who *do* bare their souls but it's just not in-your-face due to the timbre, the type of voice & factors alike? It sounds subdued but it could be they express it differently than, say, Dennis or John who people usually describe as "emotive" & "soulful". There's many colors & shapes of voices, so the bottom line would be it isn't that some singers lack soul, just the way they sing, they sing like that & to them, they may sing with soul, expressiveness but to us, it sounds like they don't convey what they sing "convincingly" (it's not the right word but the right word escapes me, excuse it).

2 cents.

I can't really speak for who I think is / isn't soulful.   I think that "soulful" is often used by fans to describe singers who inflect / emote with their voices who might not necessarily be gifted singers like a Carl Wilson, Freddie Mercury, etc. 

Of course, that's not always the case. 

George Harrison had a more laid back vocal style than John or even Paul, but I don't think that means that he didn't believe what he was singing.   It's just less of a raw style than John or Dennis Wilson. 


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Buckethead on March 30, 2018, 09:36:23 AM
Freddy Mercury was not a "gifted" singer?  While I'd never considered Queen my cup of tea, it never occurred to me that this man
lacked anything in the vocal department. As far as Carl is concerned, he is my favorite Beach Boy in terms of vocals - love his voice and find his work "soulful," although in terms of whether he is gifted, I'm on the fence...


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: KDS on March 30, 2018, 09:44:27 AM
Freddy Mercury was not a "gifted" singer?  While I'd never considered Queen my cup of tea, it never occurred to me that this man
lacked anything in the vocal department. As far as Carl is concerned, he is my favorite Beach Boy in terms of vocals - love his voice and find his work "soulful," although in terms of whether he is gifted, I'm on the fence...

Re-read my post.   I said that Carl Wilson and Freddie Mercury were gifted.  For my money, Freddie was the most talented singer in rock history. 


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Buckethead on March 30, 2018, 09:54:43 AM
" I think that "soulful" is often used by fans to describe singers who inflect / emote with their voices who might not necessarily be gifted singers like a Carl Wilson, Freddie Mercury, etc. "

Sorry, I misinterpreted your post - I took it to mean that Mercury and Wilson given as examples of not gifted singers who inflect/emote well.  We are of one mind, it appears!


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: KDS on March 30, 2018, 10:02:20 AM
" I think that "soulful" is often used by fans to describe singers who inflect / emote with their voices who might not necessarily be gifted singers like a Carl Wilson, Freddie Mercury, etc. "

Sorry, I misinterpreted your post - I took it to mean that Mercury and Wilson given as examples of not gifted singers who inflect/emote well.  We are of one mind, it appears!

Yes, and I'm not saying Lennon wasn't a really good singer. 

But, I often see the word "soulful" used to describe singers like Dylan, Dennis Wilson, Layne Staley, Lou Reed, or Tom Waits, singers not nearly as good as Carl, Freddie, Paul Rodgers, Ronnie James Dio, or Glenn Hughes. 


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on March 30, 2018, 04:39:51 PM
Buckethead, can you address things I'd written in Reply #155? 2nd paragraph about voices & soulfulness differing wherein every singer. Read it & say if you agree/  disagree, can add few cents to discussion. I'd written them for everybody chiming in to discuss, not just KDS. Surprised you didn't say anything about it as you seem very interested in discussing various topics. I brought some subject to discuss for you as well. I'm curious about fresh new people to the board's perspective.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Buckethead on March 30, 2018, 06:58:45 PM
Hello, RangeRover I!

     I wasn't purposefully giving your comment short shrift so much as you brought up a topic on which I needed time to consider.  What is "soulful" to me might not be to another - a very subjective thing. All I might offer to this discussion are a few thoughts:
I sense it in singing when the vocal nails the emotion a song is trying to project because the singer at least seems to be feeling it.  I never really thought of it as a label reserved for less-than-excellent singers. I've heard people say that Barbra Streisand, for example, sings with soulfulness, and she is considered the cream of the crop in terms of female singers. Yet I somehow can't buy into it because she seems to be putting her emotional energy into technical perfection and vocal gymnastics.  The Band's Richard Manuel, on the other hand, while not what one would call a singer's singer, nails it for me every time: "I shall Be Released." And
Rick Danko, on "It Makes No Difference" makes me buy what he's selling every time.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Buckethead on March 30, 2018, 07:04:37 PM
Since we're on a John Lennon Thread, I'll add that it was George, not John et.al., whom I would consider the soulful singer of the Beatles. IMO, none of them were really great singers, but it was George's singing that reached down, yes, into my soul. 


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Ian on March 31, 2018, 06:01:33 PM
John hands down for me.  George wrote some nice tunes but I never thought much of him as a singer


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: pixletwin on March 31, 2018, 06:03:46 PM
Anyone here ever listened to the single which John father, Alfred, released in the mid 60’s? It’s interesting, to say the least.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Buckethead on March 31, 2018, 07:15:40 PM

Gosh, I have now! Here it is. What do we think? Competition for Murry?
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgbVRQOnQk8

And her's the B side...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRlDUeVcTYs


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: pixletwin on April 04, 2018, 11:48:25 AM

Gosh, I have now! Here it is. What do we think? Competition for Murry?
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgbVRQOnQk8

And her's the B side...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRlDUeVcTYs

I had never heard the second link. Thanks for digging that up. Nicely done.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: JK on April 20, 2018, 03:56:17 AM
Not many songs make me cry. Three of them are by Mr Lennon.

I first heard "Beautiful Boy" the day after John was murdered and my son was Sean's age. I can't listen to that song anymore.

"#9 Dream" is one of those strange songs which mess with your head (and eyes) without one really knowing why. Perhaps in this case it's because it feels like a glimpse into another world (or heaven).

"Woman" is one of the greatest and most moving love songs ever recorded. But not a song for every occasion.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Summer_Days on April 20, 2018, 12:05:43 PM
Of all popular music, my two favorite visionaries are Brian Wilson and John Lennon. Plus The Beach Boys and The Beatles are (in that order) my two very favorite bands.

While there are those who abstain and love each member equally, most of us have a favorite member of The Beatles. John is mine. He is one of the artists that is on my personal Mount Olympus of songwriters. Most of my top 10 favorite Beatles songs were his.

It's popular today to either place John high on a pedestal or say that he was a complete asshole. Though I understand the reasoning for both views, the reality is somewhere in the middle, which is where I'd like to be. Does he deserve all his massive praise? I don't know about all of it, it is seriously massive, but he deserves heaps of it. Does he deserve tons of criticism for the way he went through life? Some criticism, sure. He did do some pretty bad things, though later in life he spoke about how he greatly regretted his actions and tried to be better. His life was a journey of constant pain and triumph and everything in between. I judge much of John, not all of him, by his music and I think there we can largely agree that he wrote some astonishing, timeless, unforgettably beautiful songs.

My three favorite Beatles songs are his: 'Strawberry Fields Forever', 'If I Fell' and 'In My Life'. My three favorite solo John songs are: 'Jealous Guy', 'Real Love' and 'Beautiful Boy (Darling Boy)', all of these songs so beautiful, only Brian's best, most emotional music like Pet Sounds can surpass it in my heart.

John is always with me. When my mother died almost 7 years ago, I listened to 'Julia' and 'My Mummy's Dead' expecting to cry but instead my heart was lifted (I think if I listened to the heart wrenching 'Mother' I would've drowned in my tears). He influences what I write (poetry and songs without music since I don't play an instrument yet.....lyrics really). I was listening to a lot of John's more searching songs like 'Imagine' when I, about 18 years ago, proclaimed myself an atheist after a long time of just being an apathetic agnostic. While I couldn't say whether he was an atheist or what, he was definitely leery of religion (which you could just chock up to his dislike of authority) and it was good to hear somebody whose music I respected seemed to feel the same as me. I was pretty alone with my atheism.

John Lennon is a complex figure and that seeped into his songwriting. Aside from Brian, there's nobody out there like him when it comes to truly great music.

Sorry for rattling on so long.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on April 20, 2018, 12:28:07 PM
Well said.

The older I get, the more I realize that the mark of a good person is someone who acknowledges their mistakes and tries their hardest to be better. I think John was a great example of someone like that.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: pixletwin on April 21, 2018, 05:39:48 PM
Yep. Well said.

John was a complex human being. His life wasn't a movie script. He was at times and angel and at time the devil incarnate. I could say the same about myself, if I am honest. Many of you could as well, I suspect.

"You wanna save humanity, but it's people that you just can't stand."

That is John in a nutshell.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: B.E. on April 22, 2018, 08:07:29 AM
"You wanna save humanity, but it's people that you just can't stand."

That is John in a nutshell.

Yeah, agreed. I've always loved the introspective lyrics of "I Don't Wanna Face It". That line being my favorite. As an aside, I think it's cool that as the M&H version fades, John ad-libs the lyrics from his "Mirror Mirror" demo.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on May 27, 2018, 03:38:32 PM
John hands down for me.
Disagree.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on May 27, 2018, 03:51:46 PM
Since we're on a John Lennon Thread, I'll add that it was George, not John et.al., whom I would consider the soulful singer of the Beatles. IMO, none of them were really great singers, but it was George's singing that reached down, yes, into my soul. 
George is best singer next to Paul. As I said before in the question, it's not about "John can sing with soul/ emotions/ things like that" but, everybody does it in different way. Everybody's got different voice, George too. He sings like this, John sings like that, Paul sings like sth. else. In short, will disagree with popular point that just few singers can be soulful.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on May 27, 2018, 04:00:51 PM

Gosh, I have now! Here it is. What do we think? Competition for Murry?
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgbVRQOnQk8

And her's the B side...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRlDUeVcTYs
I found these back in 2010. :3d Read Beatles bios, got interested in Beatles' family history, checked Beatles boards & smb. mentioned Alfred sang 2 songs. Lousy singing ofc but curio.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on May 27, 2018, 04:37:01 PM
The older I get, the more I realize that the mark of a good person is someone who acknowledges their mistakes and tries their hardest to be better. I think John was a great example of someone like that.
It's good for John & people around him. You didn't meet him, many fans here didn't meet him. Then it shouldn't matter what John was like, if he tried to be better etc. We musn't care. People bash Mike, fairly-not fairly, praise Brian, fairly-not fairly, but in these cases it's valid thing to do. BBs fans mainly praise Brian not due to good personality traits but music talents. Mike's bashed due to saying negative things about Wilson brothers, lame jokes, stage banter, can't play instrument etc. Nobody generally studies these 2's characters. To make it easier to read/ get, I'll say this - if smb. is good, it's good for them & immediate friends/ family. Likewise if smb. is bad person, bad for them & fam/ friends.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on September 29, 2020, 04:04:00 PM
Been reading ancient solo Beatles album discussions at Beatles.ru. I'd like to hear stuff that didn't hear previously. Today listened to Mind Games, John's 1973 album. B4 listening to it, knew just the title track which I immediately disliked/still dislike.

Generally, didn't enjoy it. Track rating 0 to 5:
"Mind Games" - 0
"Tight As" - 2
"Aisumasen (I’m Sorry)" - 0
"One Day (At A Time)" - 0
"Bring On The Lucie (Freeda People)" - 1
"Nutopian International Anthem" - 5
"Intuition" - 0
"Out The Blue" - 3
"Only People" - 3
"I Know (I Know)" - 1
"You Are Here" - 0
"Meat City" - 2


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: JK on September 30, 2020, 03:18:14 AM
Been reading ancient solo Beatles album discussions at Beatles.ru. I'd like to hear stuff that didn't hear previously. Today listened to Mind Games, John's 1973 album.

I'll be interested to know what you think of Walls and Bridges when you get there. Actually it's the only post-Imagine album of John's I'm familiar with but I think it's super. "#9 Dream" is a fantastic song!


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on September 30, 2020, 06:20:05 PM
Walls & Bridges is next discussion at Beatles.ru, i.e. finished hearing Mind Games, then next listened to W&B. As with MG, single song in it I knew previously - "Steel & Glass". Back then, would give it 0. Today, it's little better. Speaking of, W&B is little better than MG. It's groovy. Track rating 0 to 5:

1. "Going Down On Love" - 3
2. "Whatever Gets You Thru The Night" - 2
3. "Old Dirt Road" - 0,5
4. "What You Got" - 3
5. "Bless You" - 2
6. "Scared" - 2,5
7. "#9 Dream" - 1
8. "Surprise Surprise (Sweet Bird Of Paradox)" - 3,5
9. "Steel & Glass" - 1
10. "Beef Jerky" - 3
11. "Nobody Loves You (When You’re Down & Out)" - 2
12. "Ya Ya" - 2,5

At Beatles.ru, nearly everybody's best track is "Nobody Loves" which didn't get just 5 but 5+, 5++. To these ears, it's best in different version beginning with whistle.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on October 10, 2020, 07:57:25 AM
Meh, listened to the other John material - really not sth. I really-really like. I must really-really like music to appreciate the artist. Otherwise hey what's the point right? I kinda get why people like "Instant Karma", it's got nice beat, & accessible stuff like "Beautiful Boy" which ain't favorite but listening to it with John fan ears, i.e. as John fan would hear it, I gather why it's really favored, Paul f.ex. said it's his fave John song in youtube interview.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: JK on October 10, 2020, 12:45:58 PM
Meh, listened to the other John material - really not sth. I really-really like. I must really-really like music to appreciate the artist. Otherwise hey what's the point right? I kinda get why people like "Instant Karma", it's got nice beat, & accessible stuff like "Beautiful Boy" which ain't favorite but listening to it with John fan ears, i.e. as John fan would hear it, I gather why it's really favored, Paul f.ex. said it's his fave John song in youtube interview.

Hey, RR. "Beautiful Boy" is a good song but I can't listen to it. They played it on the radio the night John was murdered. My own son was two at the time so it hit home rather hard.

I love "Instant Karma". It's a good song anyway but Phil Spector's production makes it a great song. Those drums! And "Woman" is the perfect love song -- absolutely flawless.

I don't like everything John did. I own three great albums of his (Plastic Ono Band, Imagine and Wall and Bridges) and I can't see myself ever adding to them.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: Lonely Summer on October 11, 2020, 02:40:04 PM
I like John Lennon, but there is a lot of his work outside of the Beatles i don't enjoy.
Two Virgins
Life with the Lions
Wedding Album
Sometime In New York City

and certain songs off the other albums. With a lot of John's music, you kind of have to agree with his POV to enjoy it. There are parts of John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band that I love, and parts that I hate. And Double Fantasy would have been much better as a John solo album. In fact, as an album, I like Milk and Honey better.

Mind Games is very good, Walls and Bridges is excellent, and Imagine is a masterpiece.

Rock 'N' Roll has some of his best singing on it.



Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: B.E. on October 11, 2020, 08:14:39 PM
With a lot of John's music, you kind of have to agree with his POV to enjoy it.
Hmm. For some of his more overtly political, STINYC-era material? Yes, I can certainly see that. But I don't get that sense for "a lot" of his music.

There are parts of John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band that I love, and parts that I hate.
I'm curious what parts you hate (and love, for that matter), but especially hate.  >:D

Rock 'N' Roll has some of his best singing on it.
I totally agree. Especially for his solo career.


Title: Re: The John Lennon General Reviews Thread
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on November 16, 2020, 06:41:37 AM
I don't like everything John did. I own three great albums of his (Plastic Ono Band, Imagine and Wall and Bridges) and I can't see myself ever adding to them.
Good decision. Don't waste time listening to the other John albums. It's trash, he's less talented than Paul (duh).


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: B.E. on November 16, 2020, 06:47:29 AM
Peace, love, and appreciation? It doesn't get much farther from trash than the best of those other albums.


Title: Re: The John Lennon Peace, Love, and Appreciation Thread
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on November 16, 2020, 07:03:07 AM
Thanks, I changed Subject title in reply. :D