When did John decide to leave The Beatles/what was the "final straw"?

And for fun, here is another postcard from John to Rolling Stone magazine in 1971. It deals mostly with John providing some info about his upcoming Imagine album. BUT notice at the top that he says "P.S. Paul isn't dead either", which I interpret as a thumbs-up of John showing support for Paul after the slagging review that Rolling Stone gave to the Ram album earlier that year. So even in the midst of the worst, the Beatles still had great affection for each other, as shown in this case by John sticking up for Paul. It also shows that John probably liked (musically) what he heard on Ram.

 

This. You can close the thread now.

 

That is certainly open to debate, to say the very least.

 

There is a fine line between creative genius and creative madness...just about every group goes through it with all the money and egos involved.
The Beatles are still the highest profile one for the obvious reason of who they were in that few year snapshot of time.

 

Perhaps George and Ringo weren't invited to play on Paul's albums?

 

yes although he was certain of his recollection as to whether Paul didn't want him to announce it or was just damned pleased that he wasn't going to announce it, so certainly Klein was the one who first said keep it quiet around the time of Toronto, Paul either later backed this plan up or like John simply went along with it.

 

The performance you mention with Yoko wailing is remarkable only in the sense that it's ear-splitting awful.

Does anybody know why George and John started fighting? Presumably George couldn't stand Yoko's presence any more and gave John a piece of his mind. But that's only my opinion.

 

Yeah, I think I've been called out for that line about five times now! I really wish I had written " John thought" instead of just stating it as fact, but alas....

 

They both wanted that last digestive biscuit...

 

This is pure speculation on my part, and in truth, if it has merit at all, its a footnote.

IMO, the Beatles peak period was Revolver - White Album (1966-68). I also think that was their peak period for drug experimentation. Like coming down from a very fine high, it was difficult for them to duplicate their creativity from that period later. All the blame, disharmony and doubt arose thereafter (post 1968).

 

but at the same time they do not make any reference to missing the i me mine session either so its not evidence that he was expected to show up for i me mine, however there remained a cordiality between them which - despite the testing times ahead - would never quite be destroyed although it was tested. I suspect it was the treatment of Macca's songs by spector and the attempt to delay the release of McCartney that were the straws that broke his back but even then some sense of cordiality could still break out.

 

God knows it wasn't the first time John fta'd a session for one of George's songs....

 

Thought Henry the horse persuaded him.

 

Yes, what you say is true. That's why Lewisohn is really going to need to be up to the task when he tries to explain the whole scenario of the break-up. So many contradictory actions and emotions were in play (as seen in the postcard), and it will be hard for an outsider to really grasp it all and explain it accurately. That article in Rolling Stone about the band's break-up is intriguing because there indeed is a great deal of evidence suggesting that the break-up was an accident (emanating from John's power play, which he undoubtedly didn't see as such at the time) that went horribly out of control. In any event, they likely would have broken up in 1972 or 1973 or 1974, because they all were moving along different paths by 1970, but there was a potential for the band to have continued if they had not made the tragic misteps that ended the band completely within a few months of 1970. If a later break-up had happened in say 1974, it might have occurred in a friendlier way.

 

"Paul isn't dead" but the post card was mailed just a few short weeks after recording "How Do You Sleep."

 

Yoko Ono often gets blamed for "breaking up the Beatles," but surely there has to be more at play than her presence/band dislike of her.

 

The always contradictory Mr Lennon.

 

The way I understand this Time thing, it's always 1965...Mr. Torrance.

 

Starting around Revolver, McCartney became the dominant songwriter in the group and by Pepper he had assumed the artistic leadership position from Lennon. McCartney was not only writing more commercially viable songs and dominating the A-sides, he was the main "idea" guy. Even though the White Album can't be considered a McCartney project, as were Pepper, MMT and Abbey Road, McCartney took over the art direction for the White Album resulting in the poster and the stark white cover.

Although I agree that the Toronto concert was probably the deciding factor (hey -- I don't NEED those guys to make music), I would say the seeds of discontent had been growing for 3 years prior to the concert. Lennon didn't demonstrate the desire or ability to regain leadership of the band post-66 and yet was not happy playing second fiddle. Meeting Yoko and developing that relationship enabled Lennon to replace McCartney as his primary artistic collaborator, making his decision even easier.

One note, I recall an article that described how hard it was for Lennon to sign the document in 1977 that dissolved the Beatles as an entity. That must have been crushing.

 

Yoko was just one, among many, of the "perfect storm" events that gathered forces especially in 1969-70. In my opinion, the insertion of Allen Klein into the mix deserves more of the blame, but there were lots of things: Apple business problems (unrelated to Mr Klein); loss of the songwriting publishing; Paul's bossiness; George's unhappiness at his song quota; etc.

 

I think had they parked the band a re-union would have been likely by 1973/4, as it was only unforeseen circumstances prevented a re-union in 1975/6, the success of the Wings tour , the birth of Sean for example.

 

Also John definitely had the meanest streak of any of the Beatles, and was the one who would lash out when threatened---although he could be as sweet as could be the next day. He could be vicious, either physically (just ask Bob Wooler) or with his pen.

 

Lots of possibilities, but the circumstances never allowed another outcome, unfortunately.

 

I could never listen to Yoko scream like a fly for more than a moment.

 

Reading this thread you get the impression that John never actually left the Beatles. It was all a big mistake.

This is obviously rubbish.