Thinking about John`s 4442-split-idea combined with the no-more-L-M-compositions again: if we want to stay in the analogy it is similar to seperated bedrooms. Wanting a full divorce shortly after that was just the next step.
I think John's wrong not wanting Granny music on future Beatles albums, the only one with no Granny music is Let it Be and that's a depressing album sometimes.
Not really sure about that. Was the RS interview post-Janov Scream Therapy? If so, he was off heroin by then...I believe (i could be wrong)
Yes it is - I however wonder wether that is a different source. It sounds more tinny than the two off-line-recordings that I heard from the tour.
I have two recordings from two different shows. He played the same 39 second excerpt on each of them but as both are audience off-air recordings they sound a bit different. This might either be a third recording of the same piece of a processed version of one of these. Or it might be a inline recording making it potentially the best source but I have doubts.
Giles seems to have lowered Paul`s nonchalant whistling at 0:24. I always took that whistling as a great, possibly even slightly devious counterpoint to John`s tirade against Paul`s granny tastes in songwriting. The whole non-dialogue is now even more unbalanced, even if you crank up your rear speakers. If that is the way they think they can treat us fans I will immidiatly cancel my YouTube account.
So this all boils down to the fact that the Beatles broke up because John was upset that Maxwell's Silver Hammer wasn't released as a single.
I think it’s a bit sad hearing John talk this way. Maybe he’s already in effect saying “it’s over” with this remark. It’s one thing for him to say, “I don’t like [song X], let’s not put it on the album.” But to seek to tell Paul what kind of song he can have as a Beatles track, as he seems to be doing here, that’s really an unbeatley thing to do. He’s talking out of both sides of his mouth here too. On one hand saying each should get 4 songs each, no shared writing credits, ostensibly to give them more musical freedom (or to himself, at least), i.e. to explore musical autonomy. But then here he is saying this which only limits Paul. He’s also a bit hippocrtical here. He had got “Mr Moonlight” and “Good Night” on albums, which arguably were along the lines of grandparent music, plus “Revolution 9,” which was much more self indulgent than anything Paul ever put on a Beatles album. Paul remained open to John’s weird musical impulses, but John seemingly sought to limit Paul in a broad stroke nevertheless. Unfortunately, it seems that putting Paul in a box was John’s main objective at that fateful meeting. Maybe this felt justified after years of Paul’s exacting, and bordering on dictatorial, approach to song arrangements. It’s sad that it all came to this.
Interesting thoughts and justified criticism! Broad stroke? I think he still liked most of what Paul did just not this type.
Wouldn't it be funny to get the whole discussion tape as bonus content for the Let It Be box set? Impossible, I know.
He was back on it again. In her book, May Pang recounts Lennon snorting heroin while he and Yoko were filming 'Fly' in Dec 1970. She wasn't speculating either. He was doing it openly in front of people while she was there as J and Y's assistant. This is on the same trip to New York that he did the Wenner interview in Klein's office. In 'You Never Give Me Your Money,' Peter Doggett also writes that the staff at ABCKO were instructed to provide Lennon with laxatives and headache medicine. (Constipation and digestive dysfunction are side effects of heroin use.)
I’m also surprised he would single out “Ob-La-Di”—a song he himself elevated to a great track with his frantic piano-intro kicking off the standard release version. It seems like he must have had some affection for the song* at some point, considering this, and his playful interjected vocalizations on the track. Notwithstanding, I guess it was a good way to nip at Paul. *maybe only if high out of his mind?
Didn't Lennon apologize for his nasty comments to someone -- maybe George Martin -- by saying he was stoned on junk during the interview? Not positive, but I think he said something like that.
All jokes aside, John doesn’t sound under the influence at all. He just sounds mean. As Jeighson1 put it, he sounds like he’s trying to put Paul in a box.
