John Lennon

[Charles J. White]

The guy who did Lennon in could just as easily have done it to the guy who delivers his mail, or some politician or a teacher at school. I’m not sure it had anything to do with John at all. The guy who did it was clearly not well. He could have opened fire and levelled an entire school. The saddest thing about John’s death is that we still have doctors handing out anti-depression pills to people who really don’t need them, and ignoring people who should be on medication and clearly anyone on meds is a lunatic who should never be allowed to own firearms despite what our friends in the NRA think.

[Shadecatcher]

The guy who did Lennon in could just as easily have done it to the guy who delivers his mail, or some politician or a teacher at school. I’m not sure it had anything to do with John at all. The guy who did it was clearly not well. He could have opened fire and levelled an entire school. The saddest thing about John’s death is that we still have doctors handing out anti-depression pills to people who really don’t need them, and ignoring people who should be on medication and clearly anyone on meds is a lunatic who should never be allowed to own firearms despite what our friends in the NRA think.

Seems to me the sick people who take shots/kill public people think they are attaining some kind of celebrity themselves. What's their motivation: jealousy, anger, the need to have their name made public? One way to stop such murders is to take guns out of the equation. Can't speak to the medical community's rationale for who gets meds and who doesn't, but some people are not identified and some stop taking their meds so it's an imperfect system any way you look at it.

[Matjaz1]

First of all most mentally ill people are NOT violent or dangerous!!!!!!!!

Second of all, most mentally ill people who are dangerous do not have schizoprenia or manic depression, but personality disorders such as hysteria(in women), narcissism(in men) and psychopaty (in both)!

In other words, most people who are dangerous and mentally ill are mentally ill in terms of being very immature!

[Led Dirigible]

^^^^ So only women experience hysteria and only men are narcissistic.

[Matjaz1]

No, you are rigth both can have it, one is more common in women another in man! I just wrote something about it, I'm not an expert, but I did read quite a lot about it, even about things like this that I myself never had!

Edited January 28, 2013 by Matjaz1

[fishhead]

Admiral William Bull once said,

"There are no great men. Just great challenges which ordinary men, out of necessity, are forced by circumstance to meet."

.....John Lennon may have had his faults but if his words and music inspire others positively then that is all good.

[Led Dirigible]

Admiral William Bull once said,

"There are no great men. Just great challenges which ordinary men, out of necessity, are forced by circumstance to meet."

.....John Lennon may have had his faults but if his words and music inspire others positively then that is all good.

[Shadecatcher]

Admiral William Bull once said,

"There are no great men. Just great challenges which ordinary men, out of necessity, are forced by circumstance to meet."

.....John Lennon may have had his faults but if his words and music inspire others positively then that is all good.

If Lennon's words and music inspire others positively then his work has benefited society in some way. It in no way excuses destructive behaviour that impinges on the rights of others. Same goes for anyone held in regard for their artistic merits, liking their music doesn't mean you'd respect the person if you got to know them.

[Black Dawg]

The guy who did Lennon in could just as easily have done it to the guy who delivers his mail, or some politician or a teacher at school. I’m not sure it had anything to do with John at all. The guy who did it was clearly not well. He could have opened fire and levelled an entire school. The saddest thing about John’s death is that we still have doctors handing out anti-depression pills to people who really don’t need them, and ignoring people who should be on medication and clearly anyone on meds is a lunatic who should never be allowed to own firearms despite what our friends in the NRA think.

That's revisionist history at its worst. Did you live through that time? Don't spread your filthy lies here. Read a little background info on his killer before you link this to the NRA . Your misinformation does little to advance your cause. Lennon was targeted by Mark David Chapman.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/29/13553386-chilling-details-of-john-lennon-shooting-recounted-at-chapman-parole-hearing?lite

[Walter]

Admiral William Bull once said,

"There are no great men. Just great challenges which ordinary men, out of necessity, are forced by circumstance to meet."

.....John Lennon may have had his faults but if his words and music inspire others positively then that is all good.

+1

[Charles J. White]

As a musician Lennon was fantastic, and I know I’m going to be in the minority here, but as a human being he was damaged goods, incredibly selfish, and a horrible man. Any casual examination of how he treated his son, his wife, and other women point this out. For some reason because of the way his life ended (and it was sad, no one deserves it) the rest of his life was given a pass. Had I been Julien, being the inferior man that I am compared to Julien, I would have punched John in the face and said 'where the fuck have you been all my life you prick'...

[Charles J. White]

That's revisionist history at its worst. Did you live through that time? Don't spread your filthy lies here. Read a little background info on his killer

I'm not defending the killer, people who kill people are clearly damaged goods to begin with and that Chapman fellow was a lunatic. Normal people don't kill people unless it is an act of self defense. I'm not sure what lies were being spread...

[imPLANTed]

As a musician Lennon was fantastic, and I know I’m going to be in the minority here, but as a human being he was damaged goods, incredibly selfish, and a horrible man. Any casual examination of how he treated his son, his wife, and other women point this out. For some reason because of the way his life ended (and it was sad, no one deserves it) the rest of his life was given a pass. Had I been Julien, being the inferior man that I am compared to Julien, I would have punched John in the face and said 'where the fuck have you been all my life you prick'...

If you do a little investigating, I think you'll find that John and his son were just beginning to get their lives back together when he was killed. He was turning his life around at the time of his death. He did start to treat Yoko with love and respect. You need to take this into consideration before you label him a horrible person. He was an incredible daddy to Sean.

My father left us when I was three and I never saw him again. If I saw him today, I wouldn't punch him in the face and ask him where's he's been. So who really knows how Julian feels except Julian.

Lyrics from Beatles' song Getting Better.

I used to be cruel to my woman

I beat her 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 (ooh)

I admit it's getting better

A little better all the time (It can't get no worse)

Yes, I admit it's getting better, it's getting better

Since you've been mine

[Dallas Knebs]

personal opinion is that I enjoy(ed) maybe 5% of Lennon's catalog. Less than 1% of his solo- scratch that- his non-Beatles work. Not sure that makes him a superior artist or less of one or some where in between. The little bit I have read and seen I thought he was way out there and pretty much a nut case.

I am in New York often for work and pleasure, the imagine mosaic in the sidewalk is in my opinion poor taste not in artistic quality rather in that it memorializes inappropriately the place where a man met his end and his maker. I think it glorifies a murder. Probably wrong, it just creeps me out.

Insofar as Lennon being a hypocrite- I won't get in line to throw any stones. I will say that what he lived is what we all live- and that is- we all live our choices. No one gets a pass.

[Charles J. White]

[Nutrocker]

Is it necessary to respect Lennon to enjoy his music and recognize that his history and personality gave rise to that music?

When it's somebody who lived their life through their art like John Lennon did...yes. When you've read up a bit on the guy like I have, something like the Plastic Ono Band album doesn't really stand up to scrutiny. And I won't even get into the flavour of the month politicizing he got into on the Some Time In New York City album...

Well nobody is perfect

<snip>

but I think he was quite an exceptional person too for real, not just an incredible musician!

Spoken like a true Lennon fanboy

As a musician Lennon was fantastic, and I know I’m going to be in the minority here, but as a human being he was damaged goods, incredibly selfish, and a horrible man. Any casual examination of how he treated his son, his wife, and other women point this out. For some reason because of the way his life ended (and it was sad, no one deserves it) the rest of his life was given a pass. Had I been Julien, being the inferior man that I am compared to Julien, I would have punched John in the face and said 'where the fuck have you been all my life you prick'...

Amen, Charles. Just remember that some sacred cows just cannot be bashed, though

Insofar as Lennon being a hypocrite- I won't get in line to throw any stones. I will say that what he lived is what we all live- and that is- we all live our choices. No one gets a pass.

Except John Lennon, of course...

Sure, some great artists are pretty detestable in a lot of ways (let's face it, Jimmy Page wasn't exactly a saint, either) but fortunately now and again they'll pull a work of art out of the hat that transcend their personal transgressions.

[goldenguitar]

He is to pop and rock music what Mozart is to classical music.His musical creativity was absolutely incredible, he is the only artist in History to have been in a band such as The Beatles and who then pursued an excellent solo career.For 20 years, he wrote nearly all his songs, his melodies were incredible, he was both an excellent rocker and a subtle pop musician.According to me Imagine is the best album ever recorded by any solo artist.

Elvis was good, but he didn't write his songs, and Michael Jackson was an average musician who contributed to the death of the real pop music and whose musical ability was not very impressive.

So the real King is Lennon, he was just not in the same league.

Edited February 2, 2013 by goldenguitar

[Anjin-san]

He is to pop and rock music what Mozart is to classical music.His musical creativity was absolutely incredible, he is the only artist in History to have been in a band such as The Beatles and who then pursued an excellent solo career.For 20 years, he wrote nearly all his songs, his melodies were incredible, he was both an excellent rocker and a subtle pop musician.According to me Imagine is the best album ever recorded by any solo artist.

Elvis was good, but he didn't write his songs, and Michael Jackson was an average musician who contributed to the death of the real pop music and whose musical ability was not very impressive.

So the real King is Lennon, he was just not in the same league as the others.

George Harrison was chopped liver?

[goldenguitar]

George Harrison was chopped liver?

George Harrison was very talented but he was not a rocker, his solo career was not as good, and his influence in the Beatles was not as strong.

Edited February 2, 2013 by goldenguitar

[fishhead]

He is to pop and rock music what Mozart is to classical music.His musical creativity was absolutely incredible, he is the only artist in History to have been in a band such as The Beatles and who then pursued an excellent solo career.For 20 years, he wrote nearly all his songs, his melodies were incredible, he was both an excellent rocker and a subtle pop musician.According to me Imagine is the best album ever recorded by any solo artist.

Elvis was good, but he didn't write his songs, and Michael Jackson was an average musician who contributed to the death of the real pop music and whose musical ability was not very impressive.

So the real King is Lennon, he was just not in the same league.

not trying to start a fight or argument. I am just interested that you feel Lennon had a more musical post-Beatles impact that McCartney. I would have gathered that up until Lennons death, most would say that McCartney made more of a musical impact. If you disagree, please set me straight?...cheers

[Nutrocker]

George Harrison was very talented but he was not a rocker, his solo career was not as good, and his influence in the Beatles was not as strong.

But at least George doesn't have an out an out embarrassment like Some Time In New York City in his solo discography...as 'bad' as George's albums like Dark Horse, Extra Texture (my personal favourite!) or Gone Troppo are perceived to be, once you actually sit down and listen to the things, you'll find at least a couple good tunes on each. IMO Some Time In New York City never should have been recorded, never mind released...John Lennon came awfully close to committing career suicide with that project.

No, George Harrison may not have been a 'rocker' per se, but ya can't really say a helluva lot of Lennon's solo work 'rocks out', either...most of the Mind Games and -especially- Walls And Bridges LP's come pretty damn close to straight Adult Contemporary Pop. It seems like every time John tried to 'rock out' on his solo albums it almost sounds forced.

not trying to start a fight or argument. I am just interested that you feel Lennon had a more musical post-Beatles impact that McCartney. I would have gathered that up until Lennons death, most would say that McCartney made more of a musical impact. If you disagree, please set me straight?...cheers

Again, as 'bad' as some of Paul's albums are considered to be (Wild Life and Pipes Of Peace seem to be considered his 'worst') none of them come close to Some Time In New York City. I don't think either Lennon nor McCartney had much of a serious impact as solo artists, they were just ex-Beatles putting out records with varying degrees of quality and/or success. I mean, they weren't really considered heavy hitters in the same way as, say, Zeppelin or The Stones were. That said, I reckon a lot of Paul's music has undergone a critical reappraisal over the years (for example, Ram was pretty much panned when it first came out, whereas now it is considered one of his best)

Ultimately it's kind of unfair to compare Lennon's solo career to McCartney's...for one thing, John's 'career' as a solo artist really only lasted about five or six years, and he never played live in any serious way. Whereas Paul has put out a zillion different albums, and put on massive tours. It's really a moot argument anyway- nothing they did as solo artists came close to what they did in The Beatles- Imagine and Band On The Run probably come closest, but even with those albums there's a couple of iffy moments...I mean, people nowadays tend to praise Harrison's All Things Must Pass as 'best Beatles solo album' but not even ATMP is close to being of The Beatles' caliber.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Nutrocker

[joe (Liverpool)]

But at least George doesn't have an out an out embarrassment like Some Time In New York City in his solo discography...as 'bad' as George's albums like Dark Horse, Extra Texture (my personal favourite!) or Gone Troppo are perceived to be, once you actually sit down and listen to the things, you'll find at least a couple good tunes on each.

No, George Harrison may not have been a 'rocker' per se, but ya can't really say a helluva lot of Lennon's solo work 'rocks out', either...most of the Mind Games and -especially- Walls And Bridges LP's come pretty damn close to straight Adult Contemporary Pop. It seems like every time John tried to 'rock out' on his solo albums it almost sounds forced.

Again, as 'bad' as some of Paul's albums are considered to be (Wild Life and Pipes Of Peace seem to be considered his 'worst') none of them come close to Some Time In New York City. I don't think either Lennon nor McCartney had much of a serious impact as solo artists, they were just ex-Beatles putting out records with varying degrees of quality and/or success. I mean, they weren't really considered heavy hitters in the same way as, say, Zeppelin or The Stones were. That said, I reckon a lot of Paul's music has undergone a critical reappraisal over the years (for example, Ram was pretty much panned when it first came out, whereas now it is considered one of his best)

Ultimately it's kind of unfair to compare Lennon's solo career to McCartney's...for one thing, John's 'career' as a solo artist really only lasted about five or six years, and he never played live in any serious way. Whereas Paul has put out a zillion different albums, and put on massive tours. It's really a moot argument anyway- nothing they did as solo artists came close to what they did in The Beatles- Imagine and Band On The Run probably come closest, but even with those albums there's a couple of iffy moments...I mean, people nowadays tend to praise Harrison's All Things Must Pass as 'best Beatles solo album' but not even ATMP is close to being of The Beatles' caliber.

I personally think that Wild Life is Pauls best album, All Things Must Pass, has about 5 good songs on it, and that includes both versions of Isn't It A Pity, Walls and Bridges has Nobody Loves You When You're Down and Out on it, Ringo did Photograph which is a brilliant song from a brilliant album. Overall I don't think that you can compare their solo careers, as they are so different. I agree that they didn't equal what they achieved in The Beatles, but then no other group has done that and probably never will.

[Nutrocker]

I personally think that Wild Life is Pauls best album, All Things Must Pass, has about 5 good songs on it, and that includes both versions of Isn't It A Pity, Walls and Bridges has Nobody Loves You When You're Down and Out on it, Ringo did Photograph which is a brilliant song from a brilliant album. Overall I don't think that you can compare their solo careers, as they are so different. I agree that they didn't equal what they achieved in The Beatles, but then no other group has done that and probably never will.

As far as Wild Life goes, I reckon the turn off there is the rougher, demo-ish quality of the tunes (great production, though- IIRC Alan Parsons was behind the board for that one and Red Rose Speedway). I actually think Paul had a lot of balls to put out an album like Wild Life at that stage in his solo career. I like it too, Joe. All Things Must Pass, sure, a lot of people seem to cherish the album, but a three record set, George? It strikes me as being a massive ego trip on Harrison's part; between the horrific Spectorized sound of the thing and the over indulgence (the Apple Jam record) ATMP doesn't get a lot of play around here compared to say, 33 1/3 or Extra Texture when it comes to solo Harrison. Between "Photograph" and "It Don't Come Easy" Ringo really owes what success he had in his solo career to George Harrison (who wrote those songs, an incredible gesture of charity on George's part). Walls And Bridges, it's the overproduction that kills that record for me- if Lennon was smart, he'd've given those songs a stripped down Plastic Ono Band approach (the demo session available on bootleg -some of which was officially released on Menlove Avenue- is my go to version of the W & B material.) I know John wrote "Nobody Loves You..." with somebody like Sinatra in mind but the Vegas type arrangement Lennon went with on the album is just too over the top IMO. Good song otherwise, though, a highlight of Lennon's career (Beatles included).

Edited February 6, 2013 by Nutrocker

[Walter]

To what level did John contribute to the Bowie song "Fame", anybody know?

Personally, I love Lennon's work - his songs from Double Fantasy still are some of my favorite works. So personal and real, which makes his passing even more sad - he seemed to be coming out of his self-induced fog of drugs and selfishness. Who knows what he would have done in the 80's, but he seemed to be heading in a good and healthy direction.

[Nutrocker]

To what level did John contribute to the Bowie song "Fame", anybody know?

If memory serves, "Fame" -it's John's riff and his voice doing the breathy "Fame..." vocal- came out of a jam session when Lennon was working on Bowie's version of "Across The Universe".

Personally, I love Lennon's work - his songs from Double Fantasy still are some of my favorite works. So personal and real, which makes his passing even more sad - he seemed to be coming out of his self-induced fog of drugs and selfishness. Who knows what he would have done in the 80's, but he seemed to be heading in a good and healthy direction.

The fact that he was planning on taking the Double Fantasy band on the road in 1981 for a world tour is another reason to curse Mark David Chapman. Having said that, though, apparently Lennon told Jack Douglas things on the night he died that Douglas has never spoken about publically- speculation ranging from Lennon planning on splitting with Yoko all the way to having serious health problems or even a premonition of his death. We'll never know, Jack Douglas will probably take that information to his grave.

John Lennon in the 1980's -or the 90's, or the 00's or the 10's for that matter- is one of those things that doesn't bear thinking about, for me. I may have mixed feelings about the guy personally, but he was taken way too soon.