But You Know It's Not Allowed: A Case for Imagine as a Lennon/McCartney Song
When Paul McCartney decided to include secret messages to John Lennon on Ram ("you took your lucky break and broke it in two" being the type of message he admits to, "I find my love awake and waiting to be / what can be done for you, she's waiting for me" the type he doesn't), he must have known how John would react. This was after Lennon Remembers
( Read more... )
Lots to unpack. In general, re: Paul making Ram in its current form rather than with "Dear Friend" as a placatory gesture, despite knowing something like "How do you sleep?" must be coming - I'm going with "he was too angry not to at this point". Lennon Remembers cut too deep not to be. BTW, lest we forget, he wasn't the only one. Derek Taylor has talked about how deeply what John said about him and the other employees hurt - which John scoffed at in later interviews -, and George Martin seems to have been the only one doing the emotionally healthy thing (instead of the indirect messages thing) and actually saying point blank to John, when he met him again, that John had hurt him, at which point John pulled his usual "that was just me being me, you had to know it didn't mean anything" defense. (Which, head, desk.) Anyway, nobody has accused Paul of being a turn the other cheek type, temper wise. And he was past the depression and "I suck" part of post-Beatledom by 1971, and apparantly wildly going back and forth between "fuck you ( ... )
Reply
(nemperor once listed the possible managers for the Beatles as of 1969, and it turned out there ( ... )
Reply
But that's exactly my point. I know the situation was desperate, but it seems like "maybe my bandmates would be uncomfortable being managed by my future in-laws", especially with band already in a band state of relations. The #1 reason that Eastmans were not a good idea of the Beatles wasn't John L.'s personality clash with Lee Eastman, but the fact that they were Paul's in-laws. I wonder if Lee and Paul discussed that at all beforehand, what they said.
BTW, this is what Paul had to say about the situation in the Beatles' Anthology:
I put forward Lee Eastman as a possible lawyer but they said, 'No, he'd be too biased for you and against us.' I could see that, so I asked him, 'If the Beatles wanted you to do this, would you do it?' And he said, 'Yeah, I might, you know.' So I then asked them before I asked Lee Eastman seriously. and they said 'No way - he'd be too biased.' They were right - it was just as well he didn't do it, because it really ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Paul's decision to try to get the others to accept his in-laws actually reminds of the whole betting busted for pot in Japan. I mean, really, what was he thinking? But maybe Paul isn't always making these decisions on a conscious level? John thought that might be the case, about Paul's public announcements at convenient moments:
John: Do you remember if Paul's statement on acid came out after Sergeant Pepper?
Q: Just as it was released.
John: I see. He always times his big announcements right on the letter, doesn't he. Like leaving the Beatles. Maybe it's instinctive. It probably is.If John Lennon couldn't be certain as to whether Paul McCartney made decisions based on conscious thought or instinctively, I'm probably not going to be able to have much luck ( ... )
Reply
Reply
I don't think John quite meant it when he told Paul he wanted a "divorce". The Beatles were ending in many ways, but I also suspect John was testing Paul's Oh! Darling claim that he wouldn't be able to make it without John. You can't live without me? Fine, I want a DIVORCE just like my DIVORCE from my wife CYNTHIA.
When Paul announced the break-up the way he did John's first thought was probably that he had been wrong: Oh! Darling and The Long and Winding Road and all those songs had not been autobiographical after all. The musical communication he had though had been going on had not been. And then Ram came out, where Paul seemed to be saying that he had been devastated, and "I guess you never saw, dear boy, that love was there", and Linda saved his life ( ... )
Reply
No to the former, and that's very possible for the later. This keeping a foot in the door thing strikes me as fairly typical for John. As long as it wasn't public, after all, he could always change his mind, and so could everyone else. (I would say that George for one wasn't likely to, but in Chris O'Dell's memoirs, she writes that when he got the news about Paul's interview/release, he went into the garden and wanted to be alone, and that it appeared to be quite a blow - George, who you'd think would have said "at last" at least on some level.) Incidentally, when they stopped touring it's worth noting that Paul was the last hold out but once he said he didn't want to tour anymore, either, suddenly that was that. It had become real. Perhaps this was the pattern - the curtain didn't fall until Paul let it fall, no matter how much the other three before that point had said they wanted it to.
As you said before, ( ... )
Reply
I've always found this bit from Lennon Remembers telling:
WENNER: You said you quit the Beatles first.
LENNON: Yes.
WENNER: How?
LENNON: I said to Paul “I’m leaving.”
John quit the Beatles by telling Paul he quit the Beatles. He told a lot of other people, too, but it was telling Paul that minute it was real. I believe Peter Doggett determined that George wasn't even at the meeting. It was telling Paul that made it significant.
Point about Linda and Scotland. That's an an interesting idea, that Paul would have behaved differently around John when she was there. Quite plausible, since John seems to have done the same thing with Yoko. I do find it interesting that John in the St. Regis Hotel interview made a comment about how they all got along with Linda. Pretty high praise from John in 1971, I would say.
Just speculating, though: what WOULD have been John's ideal way for ( ... )
Reply
Indeed he did. I hope Ringo told him what went on, otherwise ensuing events must have been even more confusing for George than they were already. Then again, John told the world in "Lennon Remembers", so he did find out then at the latest.
I do find it interesting that John in the St. Regis Hotel interview made a comment about how they all got along with Linda. Pretty high praise from John in 1971, I would say.
True. Some of it was probably because of that awful sexist cliché that was making the rounds then that the entire Beatles collapse was due to a Linda/Yoko feud, and he was eager to set things straight. (Isn't there even a Mimi interview from 1970 where she says it must have been all because of Yoko and Linda?) But I also think John meant it in that he found Linda herself unobjectionable and even good company. Her getting along with as many rock stars as she did as a photographer wasn't solely because some of them had sex with her. I mean, if Barry ( ... )
Reply
Reply
I wonder if the fact that John lashed out at so many people people in Lennon Remembers, instead of just Paul, could have been a factor. I suggested earlier that Paul felt guilty when it appeared that John was triangulating Cynthia and Julian into his drama with Paul. I don't think it was really because of Paul that John felt the need to lash at everyone and their dog in Lennon Remembers, but I wonder if Paul felt some degree of responsibility. Especially where the Eastmans were concerned.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Sidenote: George Martin’s music, please, just play me some. Well, in 1970 there was always that ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment