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

Anyone know what the crossed-out words were under "Elvis"?

 

I think they were like brothers - they could 'have a go' at each other but heaven help anybody else who did...!

obviously being together for so long and SO BIG became a strain, plus as each got older they quite understandably began to grow apart more, musically John wanted to explore his arty works with Yoko, Paul was into doing his own thing, George loved playing along with The Band, Eric Clapton, etc where he was NOT seen as the 'kid' in the band but as a respected and liked fellow musician, Ringo was acting (well being 'Ringo' on the big screen really) and about to go on his 'Sentimental Journey' etc

John and Paul's recent marriages signified major changes in their lives too, so again the split is not that surprising

in retrospect the business disaster that was Apple created a lot of bickering and non musical frustration, which added to them no longer playing live anymore saw the 'glue' that had held them together (which had lasted very well since 1966) began to dry out...and the parting would probably have come naturally as the swinging sixties ended...

what is sad is how nasty and childish it all got - tho' I suspect they were not at each others throats personally anywhere near as much as many book writers have later let us believe (that postcard clearly indicates John and Paul wern't that at loggerheads on a personal level)

Paul once said John might upset someone but would then say;
'hey, it's only me...!'

I do think that by 1969 George - who 'didn't suffer fools gladly' (per Paul later) - was seriously 'under whelmed' by Yoko whom John was so besotted with (well most of the time at least) and that relationship in the band took a knock that probably never recovered....

I have read that George invited John (but only John) to perform at his Concert for Bangla Desh....John of course immediately wanted Yoko to be included, but I think George did not....and that caused further 'cooling' between them

happily all were still mates with Ringo !

I had a good laugh at someone earlier on this thread actually believing Yoko was more talented than Paul...well each to their own !

 

Nice points, especially your comment:
what is sad is how nasty and childish it all got - tho' I suspect they were not at each others throats personally anywhere near as much as many book writers have later let us believe (that postcard clearly indicates John and Paul wern't that at loggerheads on a personal level)

 

Life is full of ironies.

I say that because of Howard Cosell's name being here.

It was from Cosell that many people learned of John's murder, on Monday Night Football.

 

Yes, that is a weird (and ultimately ironic) choice to be on that list.

 

I would wager that McCartney could expect these types of postcards from Lennon right up until the time he served Lennon with a lawsuit... even after 4/10/70, it just was implications and blather, and I'm sure there was still love and communication there... Once the lawyer showed up and Lennon was served, Lennon really started throwing the vitriol-loaded darts at McCartney's head.

 

Oh yes, John could raise a huff---for a while (mostly around the time of the Lennon Remembers interview for Rolling Stone magazine, circa late 1970 to early 1971). But by late 1971, they were back on track, as shown by another note from John to Paul:

.

 

No one knows for sure. I've seen it speculated that the crossed-out word before "fat" is "dead." That would be plausible, since Lennon was one of those people who on occasion said Elvis died when he went into the army. Looking at it now, I think that word could also be "lost." He may have initially written that for Elvis and then decided it fit George better.

To me it looks like the crossed out stuff after "fat" is "and ____." I don't have any good guess about what the second word there would be.

 

Ah! You're right. But she really didn't start pursuing John in a romantic sense until a full year later, contrary to their later mythologizing. I'm not aware of any evidence that they saw each other or spoke to each other between first meeting at an art show in Nov. 1966, and then her getting into the Fool on the Hill session briefly in Sept. 1967.

John, like the rest of the band were definitely drifting/creatively restless in the fall of 66, hence the start-over, dismantling of the mop tops and Pepper. But at first they thought they could solve their creative frustrations collectively as a unit, and they did for a year or so, but by the end of the White Album they must have all been at least considering the possibility of a split sooner rather than later.

 

Paul had a lot to do with the arrangement of "Come Together".

 

Then obviously Paul must written and arranged both songs! In fact, he sang them in a disguised voice!!

 

I do think Paul and John were in ways holding George back in 1969--which is unfortunate as his surge in songwriting could have sustained the Beatles longer while John had a slump in productivity (if not quality).

Clearly, George had a lot of strong material coming through, but Paul and John were more interested in keeping the status quote of their winning formula (mostly John/Paul songs with just a few George) and too ego-driven by then to change the formula or take a back seat to George for an album or two.

Objectively speaking, George probably should have had three songs on Let it Be, and four on Abbey Road. No sane reason why "All Things Must Pass", "Let it Down" and "Isn't It a Pity" should not have been Beatles songs.

Cut "Maxwell" (make it a b-side to "Here Comes the Sun") and "Sun King" (John can save that idea for later--would have fit well on Imagine LP) and put "Isn't It a Pity" instead on Abbey Road.

Put "All Things Must Pass" out as a double A-side single with "Cold Turkey." Keep everyone happy!

Cut "Dig It" and "Maggie Mae" (b-sides maybe) and record "Let it Down" for Let it Be at the same time the Threetles do "I Me Mine."

 

That's not true. And here's a strong piece of evidence: John was friends with the New York journalist and broadcaster, Howard Smith, who said that when John was writing Imagine, he came over to Smith's place to play the song. Here's Howard Smith, quoted in a 2013 article from Mojo magazine:

"John came over to my loft one day and he was all excited," Smith recalls. "He said, 'I think I finally wrote a song with as good a melody as Yesterday."

Sat at Smith's piano, Lennon revealed he had a title – Imagine – but only a smattering of lyrics. For the rest he sang 'scrambled eggs'.

"He played it through and asked me what I thought. 'It's beautiful.' 'But is it as good as Yesterday?' 'They're impossible to compare.' So he played it again. And again. And he said, 'You'll see, it's just as good as Yesterday.'"

That is nothing but good old-fashioned jealousy. I imagine (no pun intended) that Paul had his share of jealousy of John, too -- particularly on the lyrical front.

 

^And on the vocals front. Apparently, Paul's obsessive approach to singing the "Oh! Darling" vocals over and over was because he wanted to try to outdo Lennon on a "Lennon type" song. Did he succeed? Hard to say. But I do like his vocal a lot. The closest comparison is probably John's version of "Stand By Me." Both tracks have powerhouse singing IMO.

 

I was talking specifically about the 1969-70 period. There is no evidence that Lennon was jealous of McCartney's 1969 work, or felt it was superior to his own 1969 work, as was suggested by Jose. There's also no evidence that his attitudes towards Paul's work in 1969 were markedly different than they had been in previous years. The fact that Lennon admired (and appeared to have some jealousy) over Yesterday does not support the notion that he was feeling greater insecurity about his work relative to Paul's in 1969 than he had before.

 

you may be onto something, check out the Bob Harris 75 owgt interview : " do you regret how do you sleep ? " " nah well ....... its all about me really "

 

that may be human nature, Paul would always be regarded as his equal so Paul was big enough to look after himself, George whatever you think of him is not regard as John's equal as a songwriter, to have a go at George's songs in public would make John look like a simple bully.

 

Ram especially. But I still miss hearing the other Beatles on Ram.

There's nothing like the group synergy that was The Beatles.

Talk about sniping, I think I read more than once that John's put down of All Things Must Pass...was that it just went on...and on...and on. But it was a breakthrough for George. As was Ringo's first album.

Likewise, Plastic Ono Band was very authentic, unique, and from the heart.

I'm not at all putting down solo Beatles.

I think my broader point was that the Beatles crashed and they were left alone with themselves.

They missed each other. And some of that translated into sharp criticism of each other.

Yet, each of them still made some great music, post Beatles...yes.

 

Nope can't agree, only POB, Imagine BOTR and maybe Ringo could stand up as a Beatles album, ATMP would too if it lost the apple scruffs disc. They were a shadow of their combined selves separately imho, none of them could consistently make a complete album close to as good Beatles record. Also John and Paul were each others quality control, the reigned in on a lot of the others excesses. Separate them and you end up with STINYC and Mary had a little lamb

 

whether or not it is true that John was either not remotely interested in what George was doing or even less likely that he was deliberately swerving Georges songs I me mine is different as it is the first - and of course only - new song they did after John's announcing that he had quit.

 

i think its only telling on whatever day he did it in 1976, it would have got very different responses in 1971 eg :-

New York : great
Ringo : Friend
Paul : Cnut
George : cool
Howard Cosell : who ?
Bowie : who ?
Elton : who ?
Elvis : dead
Bootlegs : good
MBE : ****

and even on another day even in 76 it would have likely got some different responses

 

Paul wasn't trying to outdo Lennon, he was trying to outdo himself. He even mentions the reason he kept coming back and doing it is because he was trying for a certain sound he had in his voice a few years earlier when he was younger. Honestly, I don't get calling it Lennon type song, Paul would have been just as likely to do a song like that as John would.

If anything John was showing jealousy with his insistence that HE should have sung that song and that it was his type of song, it means he liked it a lot and probably wished he'd written it.

 

You mean from home?

 

I agree with this. The show was on Sept 13 1969 and a little over a week later there was a Beatles meeting to sign contracts where John said he was done. I have read interviews where he said playing live at that show was liberating and convinced him to end his work with the Beatles.

 

In the 1970 Rolling Stone interview Lennon specifically states, undoubtedly with a hint of embarrassment, "We were doing 'Bulldog'..."

He also said it deserved to be the single, which it was.

Lennon could be very insecure at times- his attitude at the time of the breakup and its immediate aftermath Lennon's various insecurities and neuroses were on display for all the world to see and hear.

Not only did Paul deny that even happened, he denied Lennon ever gave him a painting in the first place! The "Lennon barged in and smashed a painting" story appeared in one Beatlebio or another (I can't remember which now), possibly a story made up completely out of whole cloth, and has been considered part of Beatles Lore (to the point of the story being related as gospel in yet other Beatlebooks) ever since...

The general theory seems to be that though they worked on it a bit at Twickenham, Lennon had already moved on at that point- as @RayS put it in the Get Back! book, "Lennon was more interested in writing about Yoko at that point than his waning interest in spirituality."

Paul had everything to do with the arrangement of "Come Together" as we know and love it. When Lennon originally wrote it he basically rewrote a Chuck Berry song, Paul called him on it and rearranged the song on the spot. Lennon still got dinged for using some of Chuck's words in the lyrics but at least it wasn't wholesale plagiarism like it would have been if the song hadn't changed musically.