John Lennon, c. 2007

[PurpleChez]

Let me begin by saying that I've been a Beatles fan most of my life. I grew up listening to my mom's copies of Abbey Road and Hey Jude. One of my earliest memories is of standing in the front yard, in the rich golden light of a late afternoon in summer, listening to "I Should Have Known Better" coming out through the windows. That awful Sgt. Pepper movie with Peter Frampton and the Bee Gees led me to seek out more of the Beatles catalog, and by Christmas '78 I was hooked. Born in '66 I was too late to experience original Beatlemania, but I consider myself lucky to have been a fan for a few wonderful years when folks still whispered about the dim possibility of a Reunion. John's death devastated me, and I still get moody on Dec 8. My daughter listened to the best-of album "1" while she was still in the womb, and she was born to "Hey Jude." Almost five years later I still cry happily when I listen to that song. I am a Beatles fan, and I imagine I will be until the day I die. I generally don't think of myself as having heroes, but nonetheless I have been an admirer, specifically, of John Lennon for most of my life.

That having been said, I have been a bit nonplussed by the transformation of John into a secular saint. The process, of course, began the moment he died, but it seems to have really taken off over the last few years. He was always remembered as a voice for peace and brotherhood, and I'm cool with that. But, to me, his inclusion in some sort of Gandhi-MLK-Lennon Trinity just crosses the line. I mean...yes, he sang "Give Peace a Chance," and "Imagine," and other wonderful, inspirational songs; he put up the "WAR IS OVER" billboards, and he used his phenomenal celebrity to draw attention to good causes. But he also said in 1980 that his activism -- Bed-In's and whatnot -- had been a publicity stunt.

In general I don't have the inclination to turn my favorite celebrities into mythical figures. This doesn't mean I don't admire them and their work. I just don't feel the need to turn pop singers into prophets. Not Lennon. Not Dylan. Not Cobain. Not Tupac. And not actors. Not athletes. Like I said, this doesn't mean I can't be inspired by them. I just try not to lose track of reality.

Anyway...if I had to name a "hero," John Lennon would be one of the first to come to mind, and I've held him in that esteem for over a quarter century now. And yet, I'm put off by the increasingly worshipful Lennon references I see here and elsewhere. People like Bob Geldoff and Bono have promoting the same issues for a generation now -- not just staging "happenings," but putting their money where their mouths are in a major way. And while they are rightfully respected for their work there doesn't seem to be that mystical aura surrounding them. Of course, that may be because they're still alive...who knows.

Point being...is there anybody else out there who respects John Lennon and loves his music but isn't quite ready for a pew at the Church of St. John?

[WCGreen]

1. It was a different time when the so-called counter culture was

operating totally on the outside...

Now, since Bono and Geldoff have generated publicity, goodwill and increased record sales, they are more accepted by the people with the power...

I don't think tat John really had a handle on where is place would be...

Remember, after the infamous bed for peace stunt, Lennon was viewed as a threat...

Nixon trying hard to evict him from the country also played a giant part in how he was handled by te media and by himself...

He went off the deep end for a good chunk of time in the mid to late 60's and was basically a drinking lout...

But he was settling back into family life and wanted to just enjoy his life when he was killed...

Bono and Geldoff are not controversial figures and so thy might not be aggressive enough for many in the current incarnation of the counter culture...

[PurpleChez]

3. He certainly was a good guy with some major-ass flaws,

just like most of us. I'm not faulting anything that John did. Rather I'm just increasingly put-off by people who whisper about the bed-ins as if it were on a par with Gandhi leading the salt march to Dandi. I guess I like to look on Lennon as a trickster -- a wonderfully important figure in the world's folklore. I don't need him to be Jesus Jr.

[WCGreen]

38. Trickster iis a good way to describe Lennon....

[annabanana]

40. kokopelli

:)

[johnaries]

2. I remember watching a documentary of John's life

and there were always people who found "special meaning" in his songs that thought he was talking directly to them.

In one scene, this kid had given up every thing he owned to travel to meet John. The camera showed John talking to the kid at the door. John told him he was not a prophet, just a songwriter. That his songs had no special meanings, they just are what they are. The kid was devastated, shocked, and looked totally lost.

Most celebrities would have just sent the kid away - but John said "Are you hungry? Do you want something to eat?" and invited this kid he didn't know into his home.

If only the rest of the world was as compassionate as John. He walked the walk.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

4. Oh, John. He is a handy target.

MKJ

[PurpleChez]

5. Thanks for that story

In spite of some of the points in my post I often regretted quite deeply, living as relatively close as I did to his home in NYC, that I wasn't old enough to go up and try to meet him. I've read stories about people meeting him in central park like that...very poignant.

[johnaries]

7. John would be the first to say he didn't deserve "Sainthood".

which, of course, makes him more of a Saint in my mind.

Still, he was a flawed human being. But he embraced his flaws and his humanity. Maybe not a Saint, but definitely an Inspiration.

[PurpleChez]

36. You echo my feelings exactly.

Thanks for letting me know that the message was received as intended. I loved the guy too. It has sort of caught me by surprise that simply suggesting that some people have maybe become too worshipful toward him would make people react as if I'd just pissed on the man's grave.

[blues90]

8. I heard Lennon say many times he was just a regular guy

He wanted to end war and did what he could to end the image that being one of the beatles brought him .

He was a threat because he had the voice and the crowd to listen .

His death was a horrible thing , I always admired what he stood for and tried to do . I never lost sight of the fact that he was human .

[ClusterFreak]

20. That was an amazing sequence, wasn't it?

It's in the "Imagine" movie, and it blows me away every time I watch it. Can you imagine any progressive minded, pop star/pop culture celebrity today...name the most influential celebrity you can think of...Bono, Geldof...on that level. Would they have let this guy in their house and offered him a bite to eat and drink? And actually sat at the same table too, at the same time? I wonder whatever became of that young kid. If he's alive today, and turned his life around, I'd have to believe that encounter with Lennon might have helped change it for the better.

[Cetacea]

25. Don't quote me on this,

but I heard that Lennon gave the guy a job, which sounds about right.

[ClusterFreak]

28. It wouldn't surprise me at all.

And if he did, he would never have gone around ballyhooing himself for being such a great guy. He would have done it quietly, respecting the young man's dignity.

[Cetacea]

31. Yup. eom.

[12string]

53. John Lennon

  Don't know about him giving that person a job or not.Another
story about John and Yoko that I heard (and believed),but can
not corroberate,is that one day they came home to their
apartment in the Dakota and there were two early teen black
boys vandalising their place, and rather than call the police
they gave the boys jobs.The world could use more John lennons
and Yoko Ono's in my opinion.

[Cetacea]

6. Link please?

I would like to see the interview where Lennon states that the bed-in was a publicity stunt. If he did say that, it may have been out of context.
If you've seen the US versus John Lennon, there is no mention of that but rather a vigorous defense of his motives. And I believe Yoko had some say so in the content of that movie.

[PurpleChez]

11. This was long, LONG before the age of "links,"

although it's probably archived somewhere. I read it in my local newspaper during the brief period of Lennon's re-emergence with Double Fantasy and prior to his death. As I recall, he wasn't saying that they had been phoney or that he didn't believe in the cause. Rather, I think he was acknowledging that some of those events (e.g., rolling around inside a sack with Yoko Ono) had more to do with publicity than with a political cause.

Please don't use one film as the definitive source for information on Lennon's life, let alone specific quotations. I mean...MOST of what he said ISN'T in that movie. I don't doubt that it had Yoko's OK. But let's remember "The People vs. Larry Flynt" -- a wonderful movie, and apparently made with Flynt's approval (he has a cameo), but it's hardly a thorough biography.

And, please, remember...I'm not dumping on John Lennon. As I said, if I had to name a hero in this life it would probably be him. I'm just talking about people turning him (and other public figures) into something he wasn't -- and (as other posters have mentioned) something he wouldn't have wanted for himself.

[Cetacea]

13. You are probably quoting the trash article in Esquire.

It was a major hit-piece on Lennon accusing him of being a hypocrite.
and I pretty sure that alledged killer Chapman read it as well.

You need to edit your OP. It's just plain wrong.

[PurpleChez]

26. It was a statement of opinion, not of fact.

Certainly, you're not suggesting that all opinions you consider "plain wrong" should be edited. I loved the man (Lennon, not Chapman) and I'm not trashing him -- or his fans (a group which includes myself). My point was simply that some people go too far in mythologizing public figures (a point that I feel is difficult, though certainly not impossible, to refute), and I thought it was odd that the aura around John seemed to have grown with unusual speed in just the last few years...so long now since his death. Perhaps due to the release of the film last year, perhaps due to the war in Iraq making "peace" once again something that people actually worry about. I'll restate that here, but I won't edit.

[Cetacea]

30. "He said that it was a publicity stunt" is not an opinion.

But I am not going to bother you about this. I think you partially answered your own question regarding the increase in John's appeal lately. The giant void that was created when he was killed does have a lot to do with it. But also, some things just cannot be explained.

[PurpleChez]

39. You're right...that's a statement, not an opinion...

but you also suggest that the statement indeed may have a source. You may not like the source, but it's still a source... Now, context is another matter altogether, and he certainly could have been quoted out of context for sensational purposes. But even then, my dim, nearly 27-year-old memories of it were not terribly offensive...it certainly didn't imply that Lennon didn't believe passionately in those causes (just listening to "Imagine" confirms that for me), but rather was acknowledging that some of his and Yoko's "demonstrations" were more about publicity and less about politics. Look...as I've said about sixteen times elsewhere in the thread, I loved the guy, love the guy; I am grateful to be just old enough to remember when there were still four Beatles. I'm glad other people still honor him and what he stood for.

[Cetacea]

14. delete-dupe. eom

[lisa58]

9. I love John...

...always will.

He just tried...what else can you do?

[Wilms]

10. You may well be pretty annoyed with me even if you don't finish reading my post.

Perhaps you are projecting.

And in the process you wove a hit-piece on Lennon's admirers and the man himself.

To compare him with Geldoff and Bono is a disservice to which they both might agree. The level of his contribution is hardly debated. Many would reasonably agree he was major mover of people's consciousness in a manner similar to MLK, RFK, and Ghandi (though many might disagree without Lennon's admirers holding it against them). Many feel, for different reasons, he paid the ultimate price for bearing the gifts he did.

Meanwhile, I know of no one who considers him a saint in the way you describe. I'm sure they're out there...it's a big world...but they're probably in a league that view Cobain, Morrison, Manson, or Reagan in that way.

And I know of no one who gave child-birth to a song written about him.

You said, "I just try not to lose track of reality." I think you've failed.

[Cetacea]

12. Thanks. Well stated , and I agree.

Lennon's intent regarding his activism was pure, though possibly, as Yoko once said, a little naive.

[PurpleChez]

18. Nah...I read the whole thing, but, yeah, it was annoying.

"And in the process you wove a hit-piece on Lennon's admirers..." -- I hardly think that stating the belief that some have perhaps become a little too reverent toward Lennon qualifies as a "hit piece." Remember, I place myself squarely among those fans, and have done so for almost thirty years.

"...and the man himself." -- Whuh? Didn't I say like seventeen times that he was the closest thing I had to a hero in this world?

"The level of his contribution is hardly debated." Really? Certainly you're not suggesting that John Lennon is universally acclaimed as a world leader on the order of a Gandhi? Sorry, but I think that there may in fact be some debate on that point.

"Many feel, for different reasons, he paid the ultimate price for bearing the gifts he did." Whuh? He was killed because a mentally ill individual believed that he was Lennon and had to eliminate the imposter. Certainly, his celebrity made him a target, but "paid the ultimate price for bearing the gifts" goes a little over the top.

You seem to acknowledge that in this big world there is "a league that view Cobain, Morrison, Manson, or Reagan in that way." I believe that you don't know anyone who thinks of Lennon in those terms. But I, on the other hand, have read plenty of stuff from folks who do, here and elsewhere, for many, many years. And that's not a big deal. It certainly doesn't hurt anybody and, if anything, it keeps some wonderful causes alive. I just felt that some of the more "over the top" sort of talk had increased over just the last few years (perhaps due to the realease of "The U.S. vs. John Lennon"), and was wondering what others might have to say about it. You made your views known.

"And I know of no one who gave child-birth to a song written about him." Hunh? I don't even understand what you're saying there, let alone how it might relate to anything I wrote.

"You said, "I just try not to lose track of reality." I think you've failed." You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but put the original comment in context. I was talking specifically about not mythologizing celebrities, about being able to enjoy the work of Bob Dylan (to change the subject) without getting caught up in the idea that he is the sign and the seal of the prophets. And I said that I TRY. I made no claims about my success rate or anything of the sort.

[Wilms]

22. Why don't you provide links to the "over the top" stuff you're referring to.

And then let us know why we should take them on with great concern.

[PurpleChez]

34. I never asked you to take on ANYTHING with great concern.

For me, this question was more a curiosity than a concern. I've been tuned into All Things Beatles for almost thirty years and it interested me that there seemed to be a surge in...let's just say a surge in interest surrounding Lennon so long after his death. Certainly, the war in Iraq has rekindled interest in earlier peace movements, and there was also the film released last year. I said nothing against Lennon himself, a man I greatly admire, and I certainly didn't intend a "hit piece" against his fans -- after all, I'm a fan. But I did say that, whether you're talking about Lennon or Bob Dylan or any of those other guys, sometimes some people (myself included) turn public figures into something that they most likely are not. I think the fact that so many posters responded to that statement as if it were some sort of blasphemy suggests that there may be some truth to that. (Damn...I hate to catch myself using the old Freudians' bit about how your denial of The Theory only proves that The Theory is correct.)

Now...I'll try to find some links when you tell me what "And I know of no one who gave child-birth to a song written about him" means. I'm sorry...I don't mean to be snide...but the gist -- or at least the intention -- of the original post was "I loved this guy, but I just think some people are getting a little silly about it," and some folks reacted as if I'd just dug up his grave and pissed on his corpse.

Speaking of which, and speaking of "links" -- some years back I read that, contrary to the official story that Lennon was cremated and his ashes dispersed at an undisclosed location, he had actually been buried somewhere, I think, in the greater NYC area. Last time I tried I couldn't find a single internet reference to this rumor.

[Wilms]

37. You, uh, wrote it in the OP?

"My daughter listened to the best-of album "1" while she was still in the womb, and she was born to "Hey Jude."

[PurpleChez]

41. But...uh...your statement doesn't even make sense as a sentence. Here it is:

"And I know of no one who gave child-birth to a song written about him." Again...I'm not trying to make fun, but I don't even understand the phrase "gave child-birth," let alone the complete sentence. Does that mean simply "gave birth"? Are you saying that you don't know anyone who gave birth to a song? Because my OP said absolutely nothing about giving birth to a song. During a song, yes, but even then -- restating it "And I know of no one who gave child-birth during a song written about him" -- I just don't understand the point you're making, or how it's a response to what I wrote about my daughter's birth.

[Wilms]

45. OK. I give up.

I quoted you saying "she was born to "Hey Jude." Sounds like child-birth to me. :shrug:

What did I miss?

[PurpleChez]

47. Yes, my daughter was born to "Hey Jude," but I honestly don't understand your point:

"And I know of no one who gave child-birth to a song written about him."

Is it merely a comment (that you've never met anyone else who had that experience) or is it a criticism? If it's just a comment, I apologize sincerely for beating it into the ground. If it's a criticism, what are you criticising? I think part of what's confusing me is the phrase "written about him" -- I don't mean to split hairs, but Hey Jude was written for and about Julian Lennon. McCartney has been very specific on that. Maybe that's just trivia, but it increased my confusion. Look...I know we've been going at it here, but I AM genuinely sorry that I had such difficulty catching the meaning of your statement -- especially if (if!) I was trying to read into it some conflict or accusation that wasn't really there.

[Wilms]

52. It was just a comment.

I was attributing the song as written about John when in fact, as you wrote, it was to Julian.

Thanks for the correction.

[KurtNYC]

15. John was born during a lull in the relentless WWII bombing of Liverpool

John Winston Lennon - was born on October 9, 1940 in Oxford Street Maternity Hospital during a lull in the WWII bombing of Liverpool, England. John's father, Alfred, was away at sea and was not there for the birth. Alfred would play an almost non-existent part in John's life. It seemed that no one could have been happier about the arrival of this new baby than Julia's sister, Mary Smith and it was Mary who chose John's name.

John's mother was a free spirit who obviously felt the burden of raising a son was too much for her. She suggested that her sister, Mary and her husband, George, raise John instead. The Smiths had no children of their own, and happily accepted the challenge of raising John.

http://www.instantkarma.com/johnbio.html

Out of that begining, bombed for years by nazis, largely rejected by his own parents comes John Lennon who 20-odd years later is singing "All you need is love". It is as profound as it is logical. Strawberry Fields is the name of an orphanage and John had been orphaned. He had seen the worst that humans are capable of and his answer was to say in effect, let's bring out the best in each other. To appeal to people and say 'give love respect and empower yourself through love, then give peace a chance' is a simple message.

A prophet no, a saint no, but a working class hero? yes. You don't need John Lennon to tap into spirituality, all you need is love.

[Wilms]

17. And as most who took his music to heart knows...

God

God is a concept,
By which we can measure,
Our pain,
I'll say it again,
God is a concept,
By which we can measure,
Our pain,
I don't believe in magic,
I don't believe in I-ching,
I don't believe in bible,
I don't believe in tarot,
I don't believe in Hitler,
I don't believe in Jesus,
I don't believe in Kennedy,
I don't believe in Buddha,
I don't believe in mantra,
I don't believe in Gita,
I don't believe in yoga,
I don't believe in kings,
I don't believe in Elvis,
I don't believe in Zimmerman,
I don't believe in Beatles,
I just believe in me,
Yoko and me,
And that's reality.
The dream is over,
What can I say?
The dream is over,
Yesterday,
I was dreamweaver,
But now I'm reborn,
I was the walrus,
But now I'm John,
And so dear friends,
You just have to carry on,
The dream is over.

John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band (1970)

[KurtNYC]

27. he rejected the idea that rock stars are prophets which is correct

what I'm saying is -- the truth is the truth no matter who says it.

And Lennon used his fame to project a whole lot of truth. The truth outlives those who speak it and I don't see anything wrong with giving Lennon credit for that.

[Wilms]

29. Like a great poet, which he was.

:toast:

[PurpleChez]

42. John himself talks about that, I think in an introduction

to "Writing by Word of Mouth." Except, as I recall, in good "Spaniard in the Works" fashion, he calls the Germans Nasties (or something like that).

And I loved your closing line.

[ClusterFreak]

16. The thing with Lennon...

...is that he was a walking (and talking) contradiction his whole life. In one breath he'd say his bed-in's et al were just 'publicity stunts', and in the next he'd decry the lack of activism in the late 70's and early 80's. You have to remember the hell he and Yoko went through with Nixon trying to deport him, and nearly succeeding. They had their phones tapped, they were followed, they were badgered endlessly by the government. If it was all just a publicity stunt to John, I hardly doubt that he would have kept speaking up the way he did for so many years and risk being tossed out of the country. In one breath, John would mock Paul's "silly love songs" and in the next he'd describe Band on the Run as a great album. John was perverse that way...he wrote a song slamming Paul called "How Do You Sleep?" and then a couple years later claimed the song was really about him.

Anyhow...your point about John the secular saint is well made. Some people unfortunately lionize celebrities who have political viewpoints similar to themselves, and turn a blind eye to their very human failings. John had those too...he was a pretty shitty husband to his first wife Cynthia and was only just starting to mend his relationship with their son Julian when he was murdered.

p.s. Paul's "Hey Jude" and John's "A Day In The Life" are the two greatest pop/rock songs ever recorded, imo. Each song represents the writer and singer at his absolute best.

[Wilms]

19. Don't you know that you can count me out (in)

You're so right.

[ClusterFreak]

23. Exactly!

Perfect example.;-)

[Cetacea]

24. Assassination sometimes does that.

Just like it has elevated the likes of JFK,MLK, and Bobby.
More power to John and the millions who miss him.

[PurpleChez]

44. Thanks for your comments!

I have always loved Hey Jude. Many of my Beatle friends in high school were much more hard-edged than me, and even belittle my love for such a "pretty" song, but I have always been so moved by it. The last half of it is, to me, the pop/rock equivalent of the Ode to Joy. One of the things about the Beatles I've become aware of only in recent years and which has really made me happy is all of the stuff that contradicts the notion that there was such unbridled hatred between John and Paul. Certainly, there were a lot of intense, negative emotions there, but I've enjoyed reading things about the friendship that remained in spite of it, about secret visits, even supposed bootlegs of visits by one to the other's solo recording session. And, regarding your second paragraph...I'm so bloody glad that you got the point of the OP. I simply meant to say that some people turn celebrities into something they're not and that, for me at least, that actually detracts from my enjoyment of their life and work. I'm an ardent admirer of John Lennon and a bit taken aback that so many took my comments as an afront to his legacy.

[ClusterFreak]

50. That's right...

...it's fine to be inspired by Lennon, or some other crusading celebrity, but it's a mistake to anoint them as the second coming. That was your point I believe, and some unfortunately missed it.

And as for The Beatles...I'm hard pressed to find any form of modern pop music - at least mainstream stuff - which doesn't have an equal or better precursor somewhere in the back catalogue of the Fab Four.

Don't get me started....

:headbang:

[Clark2008]

21. Your story sounds exactly like mine down to the Sgt. Pepper movie.

Only I was born in 70.

However, after having read numerous books on John Lennon's life, I would hardly classify the man as a "saint."

He was a musical genius, intelligent with a sharp wit, but he was also drug-addled, a womanizer and haunted.

I can love his music without considering him a "hero."

[Terri S]

32. ooo, you just made me feel SOOOO old

;)

[PurpleChez]

46. Would you mind recommending any books in particular?

I haven't read anything book-length about the Beatles since the immediate aftermath of Lennon's death. I've got the Hunter Davies book (vintage paperback!) but it's a tad out of date. As you might guess, I'd love to read something even-handed, not too worshipful but not some Albert Goldman hatchet job either.

"intelligent with a sharp wit" -- I wrote elsewhere here about how I'm more than happy to look to John as a "trickster" rather than a prophet, and the trickster is one of the most important figures in the world's stories.

[Clark2008]

51. I'll have to think about that - it's been awhile since I read one, too.

But, I didn't want you to think I was ignoring you.

I'll go searching the interwebs and see if book names jar my memory. I have awful pregnancy amnesia right now and can't remember my middle name half the time. ;)

Also, keep in mind that I'm due any second with my second child. Please forgive me if I don't get back in touch - but I'll try! :)

[LoZoccolo]

33. I have thought that John Lennon and the Beatles have been overrated for some time.

For instance, the music of Noel Gallagher of Oasis is an order of magnitude greater in quality.

[PurpleChez]

35. For me, it's not a question of being overrated,

because I don't think there's one single band that I hold in higher esteem. To me, the mistake is in thinking that it is all somehow inherent in the music, when in fact it's an incredibly complex interaction of the music, the musicians, the audience, current events, etc., I think it is impossible, pointless, and even wrong to try to consider the Beatles (or Oasis, or Beethoven...) separated from our emotional experience of their music, and that involves so much more than just the music. Sorry if that sounds flaky. I'm actually agreeing with you.

[Cetacea]

43. The group Oasis are Beatle wannabes, yes?

Just curious. I hear that they are very good.

[LoZoccolo]

48. Not really. I like to use the analogy of Laika the space dog.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=2851046

[PurpleChez]

49. I've heard that from the moment they hit the scene.

But I'm not familiar enough with them to say one way or the other. As a huge Beatles fan I always sort of had a "WTF" reaction when I read the "as good -- or better -- than the Beatles" comments that were bandied about regarding Oasis and the Gallaghers. I always liked what I heard, but it didn't overwhelm me.

But on the other hand, I sometimes wonder how many decent musicians have been marginalized or ignored because someone decided "they're not as good as the Beatles" or Dylan or whoever. Just last night on NPR they were talking to some modernist composers, one of whom made a great comment about how music is the only field of art in which people -- including some of the artists -- assume that the best days of their artform are 200 years in the past and can never be equaled.