CNN Documentary: Losing Lennon

Didn't you read the above posts? It's not about building his 'mystique'. Part of his motivation was to garner fame; to get his name in print. Don't help the bastard out.

Regarding the other killers listed above I would venture to say that many of us didn't feel as close to John Kennedy or Marin Luther King (maybe because of our age) as we did to John Lennon, and it felt much more personal.

 

When is this getting repeated? I can't seem to find showtimes anywhere.

 

He's mentally ill, that makes it pretty easy.

 

Nicely put - the voices in his head keep him company.

Add me as one who won't indulge his desire and speak his name. I would be happy and content if my soon coming child never knows or hears this man's name. He isn't important - to me, John Lennon was.

 

Not to sound morbid, but two things could be done - put him in general population, or...let him out. I'm sure he wouldn't last that long. Somebody would do him in. Wait.......scratch that....we don't want that SOB being labeled a martyr.

 

Am I the only one here who doesn't have some sort of silly grudge or death wish against Chapman?

 

Nope.

 

Hmmm never thought of it as a grudge...I appreciate there are different feelings about this incident and this killer. The killer of John Lennon needs help and time, not my attention. The best positive action I can do is to keep John Lennon's life in my memory and the memory of others and not focus any time on the killer. I absolutely respect how others deal with it.

 

Wow.

First of all, there's a lot of ground between "silly grudge" and "death wish." One isn't equal to the other.

Secondly, I don't think "silly grudge" is a fair characterization of the resentment, outrage and anger that people feel, even after 30 years, toward a psychopath who shot to death, without provocation, a husband and father of two who also happened to be one of the 20th century's greatest songwriters and a leader of the peace movement.

After all, the cultural void left by Lennon's death is just as big today as it was on Dec. 9, 1980. It's not as if he's less dead now than he was then. It's not as if he has been "replaced" by Kanye West or whoever... So the fact that people still feel that loss today is to be expected.

Now, I can understand why -- if you're of a certain age, or of a certain taste in music -- you wouldn't care much about Lennon's death 30 years after the fact. Nothing wrong with that. But you should be able to at least relate to what people are expressing ... unless, of course, your life hasn't been touched by anyone the way millions were touched by John Lennon. If that's the case, too bad for you.

The point is, there's no reason to be smug about not feeling the pain or sense of loss that others are expressing. It's unseemly and it's uncharitable.

 

Nicely worded Clark. AKA could use a little empathy.

Empathy:
1. The ability to identify with and understand somebody else's feelings or difficulties.
2. The ability to feel what another person feels, whether you've been in their position or not.
3. The transfer of somebody's own feelings and emotions to an object such as a painting.

 

\I'm the biggest "Beatard" I know, and I think John Lennon's death is very sad. There's nothing wrong with grieving the loss of Lennon. I grieve it in my own way, but I wish no harm against Chapman. In fact, I hope he is getting the help he needs and will someday receive the forgiveness he doesn't deserve.

And Digital-G, I do have empathy. I just think it's counter-productive to wish murder on a man who murdered; especially someone who is obviously very, very mentally ill. "An eye for an eye will make us all blind."

I have experienced first-hand the murder of someone I knew very well (a little girl who was no more than three years old). I take that loss much more personally than that of a man whose music, life and ideals I admire. Yet I have no ill will against the man who killed her. He's been in prison for the last twelve years, and, like Chapman, probably will be for the rest of his life.

Why waste your energy on Chapman? Why not focus on John Lennon, his music and his legacy?

 

Well, judging by the list that came out a few months ago, he still needs help. Not happy unless he's in the limelight. And to think that coward is in a picture getting an autograph before John left for the studio.

 

Chapman isn't the only person to kill for the notority or thirty seconds of fame. He just happened to kill someone that many members of this forum equate to a musical god, so that make the act more vial to them. Lennon's death is no more or less tragic than any other sensless killing that happens on a daily basis. Working in and walk around a female correctional institution with a death row has only made that point clearer for me.

 

The main difference is (other than the fact that two of the people you listed were serial killers), C***man is still alive and wanted to be famous (Phil is still alive too, but was already famous, and the killing may have been accidental).

 

Good points made.

 

On the same topic,VH-1 ran a Updated Version of its "Behind The Music" on Lennon called "The Last Days-The Legacy" ,including the "Anthology" topic,as well as mentioning the 2010 Lennon Remasters,too..it may be re-run soon.

 

I managed to record this Behind The Music "remastered" show to DVD. I have the original version from 2000 on VHS so I'm gonna go dig it out and record that to DVD - that way I'll have both versions of the program on the same DVD.

So, were the Lennon CNN programs aired again? I did record those shows to DVD also, just wondering if they showed them again.

Out of all the Lennon programs I caught this week, the best by far was the American Masters LennoNYC doc. I'm gonna definitely buy that one.

 

To be clear, I didn't say ANYTHING about bringing harm to him. I didn't even imply it. I'll assume your comment was aimed at some of the other posts.

I realize the guy was mentally ill and I only commented about not wishing to use his name. Some people might feel it's 'silly', but I don't feel it's silly at all. I don't want anything that I do to add to his fame and I cringe when I see others do just that, immortalizing his name. He was looking to get famous by killing a celebrity and had even considered the likes of Elizabeth Taylor and a couple of others that I can't recall right now. He chose John Lennon, as least partly, because he was so accessible.

I guess for me, that's the 'rub'. Others may do horrendous acts too, due to mental illness, political reasons, love, or even money. But when part of the motivation is just to become famous... I don't want to help.

 

Did anyone catch the short bit on Fox news on Saturday? They have a show called Media Watch or something like that. They played Howard Cosell's announcement during Monday Night Football. But they also aired the discussion between Cosell and Frank Gifford during the commercial just before. They debated whether to say anything or not (it was a crucial point in an important game.) Cosell wasn't sure they should disrupt the game. Gifford said "No we have to. This is going to be World changing." Or words to that effect. I had never heard that before.

 

I recall Johnny Carson being one of the celebrities on his list.

I agree 100%, that's why I never say his name either.

 

I hear you. I read the Rolling Stone interview this weekend and had to pause almost every paragraph. The magnitude of the loss is nothing short of profound. Still.