Yoko and Paul: separated at birth?
Or, my thesis that Yoko Ono and Paul McCartney share more traits than hardcore critics and partisans of either are prone to admit.
My list so far:
1. “Usually soft-spoken demeanour contrasted by bossy domineering personality” is a description you find applied to both by their contemporaries (whether they mean this as a criticism or a compliment depends on the speaker) .(Meaning people who can't stand them describe them as control freaks and people who like or even love them rave about their iron-in-velvet strength.)
2.They’re workoholics, in contrast to John’s self-confessed laziness. The following quote by May Pang describing John and Yoko in 1972 works just as well for John and Paul through the 60s, minus the money part: “John was a man of great energy and intensity, but when he didn’t have a project to occupy his attention, he became lazy and could spend all day in bed, watching television. Yoko, however, was a non-stop worker. She was always spinning off ideas for new projects. To do her work, Yoko needed John. It was his money being spent, so when John refused to work, she could not work.” (You can see where the above mentioned bossiness strength would come in handy and would indeed been direly necessary in order to get anything done at all.)
3. They were confident and ambitious enough to come into entirely new group situations with clear ideas about things should be run, despite being newbie outsiders. Consider this description of (only recently turned)15 years old Paul’s first session with the Quarrymen after John had asked him to join the group. John and pals were all about two years older and had been friends for years, which could and should have been intimidating. However, to quote Bob Spitz: Their first official practice together, a Saturday afternoon get-together in Colin Hanton’s living room, was revealing. Paul blew in, full of enthusiasm, ready to rock. He knew more than a dozen songs that the boys had been eager but unable to pull off. (...) Such an extravagant outpouring did not go unappreciated. For perhaps the first time in his life, John ceded the spotlight without putting up a struggle. In another situation, he might have misread the situation as a blatant power grab; anxious about losing control, sarcasm would have surfaced to mask his envy and inexperience. But he was enamoured of Paul’s prodigious talent, so much so that all previous reservations disappeared. Transfixed, John squatted on his haunches, squinting, close enough to study Paul’s elastic hands.” If you compare quotes describing John’s reaction to Yoko Ono, and later of her showing up in the Abbey Road studios, the parallel is obvious.
4. They’re thin-skinned about criticism. Again, compare Jack Douglass (= producer of John and Yoko’s “Double Fantasy” album)’ description of recording with Yoko with Geoff Emerick’s of Paul in the studio - “Paul usually knew exactly would he wanted and would often take offense at criticism” (with John as the only exception and the person from whom he accepted it) - and they’re alike.
5. They seem to be good parents getting along very well with their children. Sean Lennon never talks other than glowingly about his mother; Kyoko (Yoko’s daughter from her second marriage whom she lost early into her relationship with John) contacted her again some time after John’s death and in what few interviews exist of her only talked well about her, too. Ditto all four of the adult younger McCartneys. (I think the only negative thing one of them has said was Mary mentioning it used to annoy them how he’d tinker on the guitar when they wanted to watch tv, which would lead to “dad, stop it” exclamations.)
6. For people who usually come across as smart, they do or say the occasional stupid thing that makes you headdesk on their behalf. For Paul: the notorious pot bust in Japan comes to mind at once. (Seriously, after several such incidents already, why carry the stuff in the hand luggage?!?) With Yoko, it’s the reply to a “how would you handle someone like Hitler without using violence?” question which is the most cringeworthy statement I ever heard of her. (She said if she’d been a Jewish girl in the 30s, she would have started an affair with him; ten days of sex would have convinced him of the error of his ways.)
7. Back to the positives: they’re good with business. This is often used as a criticism of them, btw, but seriously, I see incidents like Paul being the only one of the four to actually bother reading contracts and scripts, to question deals and later starting to invest his money, and Yoko brokering record deals in the late 70s as in their favour. “Starving” isn’t a pre-condition for “artist”.
8. While not prone to constant temper outbursts (not that it NEVER happens, but it appears to be the exception, not the rule) - verbal tantrums were John’s thing, not theirs -, they can on occasion deliver classic passive-aggressive verbal slaps. Choice examples would be Paul’s late 1969 reply to the question whether he likes John’s “Two Virgins” and “Life with the Lions” LPs (“I love John and respect what he does” which is as obvious McCartnese for “can’t stand the stuff” as you’re prone to get) and Yoko’s 2001 “John asked me why more people cover Paul’s songs than his and I said: Because you’re a true artist, not someone who rhymes June with spoon”.
9. On the other hand, they’re also effusive and unstinging with the praise when they’re in the mood and don’t seem to feel the need to qualify it. Also they’re prone to focus on the positive when reminescing about the past (and certain dead people) rather than to dwell on the negatives.
10. If you mess with them, they will take you to court. Ask Fred Seaman. (Former P.A. of John, one of Albert Goldman’s primary sources for the John-as-drugfed-prisoner-of-evil-Yoko-during-the-househusband-years story, made away with John’s diaries and some personal property, had to return all and apologize to Yoko by order of court before being condemned to 19 months in prison anyway.) Ask, indeed, John Lennon. (“Because I asked for a divorce? That’s a silly reason to go to court.”) (That was an actual quote. John logic was not like earth logic.)
11. Quiz Time. I’m removing a name from the following quotes. Are they a) descriptions of John and Yoko, or b) descriptions of John and Paul: ”After a while, they’d finish each other’s sentences. They’d grown that dependent on each other.” “Say the wrong thing, contradict them, and you were frozen out. A look would pass between them, and afterwards it was as if you didn’t exist.” “John and X were inseparable, like Siamese twins, it was as if the rest of us didn’t exist.” No, it’s not the Beatles and their entourage complaining about Yoko Ono. It’s the Quarrymen talking about that baby-faced intruder Paul McCartney. (The quotes are from Eric Griffiths, Colin Hanton and Charles Roberts respectively.)
12.Between their various affairs in the 60s (cue sexual double standard by a lot of journalists), Yoko’s discreet long term relationship with Sam Havadtoy post-John, Paul’s disastrous second marriage post-Linda and current relationship with Nancy S., one can safely conclude neither of them was made for celibacy.
13. They look good in their age but would look even better if they stopped dying their hair. Otoh the fact they do this but never bothered with botox or surgery and instead proudly own their wrinkles makes it oddly charming.
14. Retirement? What’s that? Why living of one’s millions when one can write and perform?
In conclusion: John Lennon had a type. Also, no wonder they navigate between competitiveness and wary respect since decades.
This entry was originally posted at http://selenak.dreamwidth.org/637047.html. Comment there or here, as you wish.
My list so far:
1. “Usually soft-spoken demeanour contrasted by bossy domineering personality” is a description you find applied to both by their contemporaries (whether they mean this as a criticism or a compliment depends on the speaker) .(Meaning people who can't stand them describe them as control freaks and people who like or even love them rave about their iron-in-velvet strength.)
2.They’re workoholics, in contrast to John’s self-confessed laziness. The following quote by May Pang describing John and Yoko in 1972 works just as well for John and Paul through the 60s, minus the money part: “John was a man of great energy and intensity, but when he didn’t have a project to occupy his attention, he became lazy and could spend all day in bed, watching television. Yoko, however, was a non-stop worker. She was always spinning off ideas for new projects. To do her work, Yoko needed John. It was his money being spent, so when John refused to work, she could not work.” (You can see where the above mentioned bossiness strength would come in handy and would indeed been direly necessary in order to get anything done at all.)
3. They were confident and ambitious enough to come into entirely new group situations with clear ideas about things should be run, despite being newbie outsiders. Consider this description of (only recently turned)15 years old Paul’s first session with the Quarrymen after John had asked him to join the group. John and pals were all about two years older and had been friends for years, which could and should have been intimidating. However, to quote Bob Spitz: Their first official practice together, a Saturday afternoon get-together in Colin Hanton’s living room, was revealing. Paul blew in, full of enthusiasm, ready to rock. He knew more than a dozen songs that the boys had been eager but unable to pull off. (...) Such an extravagant outpouring did not go unappreciated. For perhaps the first time in his life, John ceded the spotlight without putting up a struggle. In another situation, he might have misread the situation as a blatant power grab; anxious about losing control, sarcasm would have surfaced to mask his envy and inexperience. But he was enamoured of Paul’s prodigious talent, so much so that all previous reservations disappeared. Transfixed, John squatted on his haunches, squinting, close enough to study Paul’s elastic hands.” If you compare quotes describing John’s reaction to Yoko Ono, and later of her showing up in the Abbey Road studios, the parallel is obvious.
4. They’re thin-skinned about criticism. Again, compare Jack Douglass (= producer of John and Yoko’s “Double Fantasy” album)’ description of recording with Yoko with Geoff Emerick’s of Paul in the studio - “Paul usually knew exactly would he wanted and would often take offense at criticism” (with John as the only exception and the person from whom he accepted it) - and they’re alike.
5. They seem to be good parents getting along very well with their children. Sean Lennon never talks other than glowingly about his mother; Kyoko (Yoko’s daughter from her second marriage whom she lost early into her relationship with John) contacted her again some time after John’s death and in what few interviews exist of her only talked well about her, too. Ditto all four of the adult younger McCartneys. (I think the only negative thing one of them has said was Mary mentioning it used to annoy them how he’d tinker on the guitar when they wanted to watch tv, which would lead to “dad, stop it” exclamations.)
6. For people who usually come across as smart, they do or say the occasional stupid thing that makes you headdesk on their behalf. For Paul: the notorious pot bust in Japan comes to mind at once. (Seriously, after several such incidents already, why carry the stuff in the hand luggage?!?) With Yoko, it’s the reply to a “how would you handle someone like Hitler without using violence?” question which is the most cringeworthy statement I ever heard of her. (She said if she’d been a Jewish girl in the 30s, she would have started an affair with him; ten days of sex would have convinced him of the error of his ways.)
7. Back to the positives: they’re good with business. This is often used as a criticism of them, btw, but seriously, I see incidents like Paul being the only one of the four to actually bother reading contracts and scripts, to question deals and later starting to invest his money, and Yoko brokering record deals in the late 70s as in their favour. “Starving” isn’t a pre-condition for “artist”.
8. While not prone to constant temper outbursts (not that it NEVER happens, but it appears to be the exception, not the rule) - verbal tantrums were John’s thing, not theirs -, they can on occasion deliver classic passive-aggressive verbal slaps. Choice examples would be Paul’s late 1969 reply to the question whether he likes John’s “Two Virgins” and “Life with the Lions” LPs (“I love John and respect what he does” which is as obvious McCartnese for “can’t stand the stuff” as you’re prone to get) and Yoko’s 2001 “John asked me why more people cover Paul’s songs than his and I said: Because you’re a true artist, not someone who rhymes June with spoon”.
9. On the other hand, they’re also effusive and unstinging with the praise when they’re in the mood and don’t seem to feel the need to qualify it. Also they’re prone to focus on the positive when reminescing about the past (and certain dead people) rather than to dwell on the negatives.
10. If you mess with them, they will take you to court. Ask Fred Seaman. (Former P.A. of John, one of Albert Goldman’s primary sources for the John-as-drugfed-prisoner-of-evil-Yoko-during-the-househusband-years story, made away with John’s diaries and some personal property, had to return all and apologize to Yoko by order of court before being condemned to 19 months in prison anyway.) Ask, indeed, John Lennon. (“Because I asked for a divorce? That’s a silly reason to go to court.”) (That was an actual quote. John logic was not like earth logic.)
11. Quiz Time. I’m removing a name from the following quotes. Are they a) descriptions of John and Yoko, or b) descriptions of John and Paul: ”After a while, they’d finish each other’s sentences. They’d grown that dependent on each other.” “Say the wrong thing, contradict them, and you were frozen out. A look would pass between them, and afterwards it was as if you didn’t exist.” “John and X were inseparable, like Siamese twins, it was as if the rest of us didn’t exist.” No, it’s not the Beatles and their entourage complaining about Yoko Ono. It’s the Quarrymen talking about that baby-faced intruder Paul McCartney. (The quotes are from Eric Griffiths, Colin Hanton and Charles Roberts respectively.)
12.Between their various affairs in the 60s (cue sexual double standard by a lot of journalists), Yoko’s discreet long term relationship with Sam Havadtoy post-John, Paul’s disastrous second marriage post-Linda and current relationship with Nancy S., one can safely conclude neither of them was made for celibacy.
13. They look good in their age but would look even better if they stopped dying their hair. Otoh the fact they do this but never bothered with botox or surgery and instead proudly own their wrinkles makes it oddly charming.
14. Retirement? What’s that? Why living of one’s millions when one can write and perform?
In conclusion: John Lennon had a type. Also, no wonder they navigate between competitiveness and wary respect since decades.
This entry was originally posted at http://selenak.dreamwidth.org/637047.html. Comment there or here, as you wish.