Here's an obscure question that I'd be surprised if anyone knows the answer to. What's the origin of the song "John, John" that McGuinn recorded for his first solo album but didn't release? The form of the song clearly suggests a humorous ballad, or perhaps a music-hall song, from the 19th or early 20th century. But its gently ironic attitude toward the church makes it possible, even likely, that it's even later than that. I would guess it's of English origin, but I could be wrong. Unlike a lot of the songs McGuinn came up playing -- the type of thing Joan Baez recorded on her first several albums -- "John, John" shows little sign of being really old, i.e. from the 16th or 17th century. Compare its diction and form to "The Trees They Grow High," "Mary Hamilton," or for that matter "John Riley" and "Wild Mountain Thyme" (and "The Water Is Wide," aka "Waly Waly"). It's quite modern in perspective and diction. The use of a long chorus is also very atypical for true old ballads. The credits for the reissue list the song as "traditional," and it certainly doesn't sound like the kind of thing McGuinn would have composed, but here's where it gets weird. I am having trouble finding any evidence of anyone else having recorded this song. There is another folk song called "John, John," but that is a different song (aka "The Fox Went Out") and it's more of a nursery rhyme. But any attempt to turn up this song, with these lyrics, comes up empty. Has anyone heard this song in any other context? For years I accepted at face value the liner notes' attribution of the tune to "trad.", but since it was an outtake, I wonder whether the compilers just had no idea and guessed, and if it's possible that "John, John" is actually a new song composed by one of McGuinn's friends or acquaintances, perhaps someone British, in a somewhat old-fashioned style. It is possible, too, that it is a new set of lyrics grafted onto an existing tune, but I don't recognize the tune.
I've looked into this song too. Like you, I've not managed to find any other version nor any proof that it's a traditional song. A real mystery.
I've seen this credited to McGuinn rather than "trad". Of course this may be a misattribution... √ John, John (Testo) di Roger McGuinn tratto da Roger McGuinn - Testi / lyrics delle canzoni su Rockol and Roger McGuinn - John, John Lyrics | Musixmatch
I think those attributions just reflect the mystery around authorship. The song has only been released once, to my knowledge, with credits and that time it was listed as "traditional." But I think we can be reasonably confident that McGuinn himself did not write it, no more than Bob Gibson wrote "John Riley."
I’ll try, but he has only responded to me the one time—when I asked about the drone vocals in ‘If You’re Gone’—and that was a few years ago now. Done. But he hasn’t been on Twitter in 5 days, so I might have to ask again when he’s online.
I tried a side route, looked at lyric websites who had either nothing or something like this: Lyrics for "John, John" by ROGER MCGUINN are not available yet
Writing a memoir would presumably require McGuinn to discuss at least some of the unseemly things he did in his pre-Christian days. I get the sense he probably would be reluctant to do this and even embarrassed. He doesn't seem the type to write a Johnny-Cash-style confessional autobiography detailing how low he sank before finding Jesus.
See my post from yesterday, links to 2 lyric sites, both of which credit the song to Roger. This could possibly be a misatribution based on guesswork though. Hopefully @Clarkophile will get a reply from Roger which would settle it.
For the most part these lyric sites are not authoritative. They just digest user submissions and mistakes tend to proliferate as they seed one another. Even a relatively authoritative site like (Rap) Genius relies on user submissions and only very rarely has the imprimatur of the artist or publisher. In this case the issue is simplified a bit by the fact that the recording has only been officially released once, and on that release it was credited to "traditional." Since McGuinn is the only musician on his recording, and since he produced it himself, any other attribution is going to have to be assumed to be guesswork (i.e., it's not like there's anyone else we can ask) unless McGuinn clarifies the matter or an earlier recording of the song is found. However, since McGuinn was involved in the reissue of his album, we may be able to infer that at some point in the process someone asked McGuinn whether he wrote it, and he said he did not (and possibly indicated that he didn't know who wrote it). But this is guesswork too. This wouldn't be interesting if the song and performance weren't good, but I think most people would agree that it would have improved the album had it been included, and that it was the most intriguing discovery of the McGuinn solo reissues.
Lol...I've even tried putting the words of the chorus into a well known search engine and all it came up with (apart from references to Olivia Newton John etc...) were the two lyric sites I linked to earlier. What you say does however make a lot of sense, if someone bothered to ask him which I suppose they would've. But then it's also possible even if unlikely that nobody asked. The liner notes for the reissue do elaborate slightly by saying "trad. arranged by Roger McGuinn" for what it's worth. It is indeed a bit of a mystery cos if it's a true "traditional" song, how come there's no trace of it that we can find anywhere. Nice catch Maggie and yes it would have made a good contribution to the album.
Re; lyric sites. Agree. Just turning over rocks for any clue or info! BTW, checked The Folk Den of Roger’s ,it didn’t turn up there - but further navigation of the site than I was able to manage might be worth a shot.
Agree with this - but maybe Roger could be convinced - or is already writing - a book JUST on the music in his life. The main focus of the book would be his Byrds and solo popular work This would be illuminating and interesting and sell. It could answer some questions, give his view on his songs and music making ; plus introduce his pre- Byrds history and his general role in Popular Music. Any general , personal statements or disclosures would be most welcome, but that part would be likely minimal and he would not be forthcoming. This would be a music book - not a bio, not a tell all, not an investigative book. Just McGuinn and music. To be honest, even if he was eager to spill his guts out and reveal details about his shortcomings, it wouldn’t be of interest to most folks - outside of people like us. LOL. Any book of that nature would only be of interest to the general public - IF he opined, disclosed and made “trash talk” about Byrds and other “names” in popular music. Ain’t gonna happen. As editor of his book, I’d have his very traditional folk and sea shanty interests allowed in - but just one chapter each. Those two chapters would expand to a whole book, published as a small batch -specialty subject book . This would be part of the contract - which would honor and respect his music interests - but not dilute the main , book and full on publicity route.
As a folk fan, I would love to have a book by Roger about traditional song. He would, I imagine, have some fantastic insights. The Folk Den site is great but I'd l more detail would be great. Bit niche though, I suppose.
It's a fine song although it does far more like a pastiche of a traditional folk song than an actual one. Having said that, there are many examples of traditional songs that aren't laden with all the usual cliches and the waters are muddied even more by the likes of Bert Lloyd who claimed to have a raft of traditional songs but in all likelihood wrote a bunch of them himself.
