I never heard anyone say heroin makes you angry. It should "nullify", right? Dampen your feelings. So being on it seems like an odd explanation for John's nood.
I believe he apologized to Martin sometime in the late 70's when he came to dinner at the Dakota . He also apologized to Glynn Johns in 1974. Johns was hurt that Lennon had dissed his 'Get Back' mix. And Lennon said something like he was just letting off steam in that interview, and he was out of his mind at the time. I think that was why he [Lennon] was so pissed at Wenner publishing a book out of it. He didn't want it to linger in perpetuity. In his head he could mouth off horribly and it would just disappear into the ether with no consequences. The people he hurt were the ones left with the burden of actually remembering the things he'd said and taking them seriously.
It's also ironic that he says 'Maxwell's Silver Hammer' was the kind of song that should have been a single. In the Wenner interview, he goes on about how Paul tried everything to make 'Maxwell's' a single, and how it never, ever could have been one.
Interestingly on the 69 tape he says that Paul should give songs like Maxwell's Silver Hammer to other Apple artists in the future rather than have them recorded by The Beatles.
Though, now that I think about my own comment, I’ve known some pretty mean addicts. Nevertheless, he doesn’t sound messed up in this recording, he just sounds like a bully. It’s such a short clip. I wish there were more. There could be greater context.
Are there any instances of John publicly saying hurtful things about people he had professional relationships with after the fallout of the 1970 period. I know we have How Do You Sleep, but that was a response to Paul's initial barbs on Ram. Obviously John was hurt by the lines McCartney threw his way via song?
Yes. He goes pretty hard on George in '71/'72 in the interview he did with McCabe. Q: "What about George?" JOHN: "George always has a point of view about that wide (he holds his hands close together), you know? You can't tell him anything." YOKO: "George is sophisticated, fashionwise..." JOHN: "He's very trendy, and he has the right clothes on, and all of that." YOKO: "But he's not sophisticated, intellectually." JOHN: "No. He's very narrow-minded. One time in the Apple office I was saying something, and he said, 'I'm as intelligent as you, you know.' This must have been resentment. Of course he's got an inferiority complex from working with Paul and me."
John's comments about George actually seem pretty accurate. It was mean to say it though, especially in the press.
George could be very stubborn and into his thing but the same goes for John. I never perceived George as a stupid fashion follower as he is painted her by both John and Yoko, that is just mean. Inferiority complex maybe, that is the only thing that sounds true.
I hadn't read this particular interview before. If you're gonna call someone narrow-minded, it helps to not do that so narrow-mindedly. This from the guy who immersed himself into far left NYC politics and was surrounded by narrow-minded radicals. What a spectrum of open thought that was. This version of Lennon is a particularly unattractive one.
Yes I agree and will add even if you were to be neutral on the politics he was taunting it seemed to be to much opportunism going on than actual bagism.
They strived to gain knowledge and wisdom and were "smart" in their own way. Maybe not super intellectual but certainly with wits.
Oh, I agree with that. I meant that none of them ever came across to me as particularly intelligent. Does not take anything away from their music.
I don't know; you have to have some kind of brains to be able to teach yourself how to make the music they did.
True. But Lennon could seem as though he was delusional. He thought he was better than the Beatles and he once thought he was Jesus Christ. Yes, delusional. But talented !
They made it to the top and stayed there. Maybe it has nothing to do with being intelligent, but perhaps their story would have been different if they had been musically brilliant but stupid people.
It's not ironic. In his comments on the tape, he's saying the song should have been a single for someone else because he didn't really like the song. In the Rolling Stone interview, he's saying the song was not good enough to be released as a Beatles single. Those two sentiments are not incompatible or inconsistent.