In 1969 the fifth Beatle was heroin

Eric's deficiencies get mentioned fairly often on this board.
We live in a time where artists have to be measured against a morality compass formed by public opinion.
I'm sure millions of those judging are hardly perfect individuals themselves. No one is.
It's just that people in the public spotlight are somehow expected to be pillars of morality, and there's a witch hunt coming for those who get caught out, especially if they are male.

While not defending the singer-songwriter who was metooed recently, that's very much an example. Guy's a *********, and was already known for it, and no one would be interested in taking him down if they didn't have something to gain - publicity and $$$. It was only possible because he may or may not have committed a felony according to US law. That's what the vultures were waiting for and when it appeared they went for the kill.
Rant over.

 

But we already know this. Why so many confirmations? He had a bad side and a good side. Just like lots of us. Why rehash the fact over and over?

 

I guess just look in one page how this thread went from drugs/breakup to Lennon awful person. Off topic concerning both the article and the thread. If he was 'awful' it was before H so why bring it up? You're right, because we have not one other activity to do in the world but put down someone to feel better about ourselves. Again, if he wasn't a murder victim, I'd understand better.

 

I am not a mental health expert, but I play one on SHTV...

 

Yes drug and alcohol addictions are a mental health issue. All four Beatles had lifelong addictions to drugs, sometimes more intrusive on their lives than other times. But ongoing addictions nonetheless. It's there plain to see in the pasts of Ringo, George and Paul. It takes a certain amount of hubris to try and blatantly enter through another country's and cultures customs with a copious amount of Cannabis.

 

I believe that in 1969 Rolling Stones (and most other rockers) weren't exclusively on avocado and chia diet either, but they didn't broke up... Wasn't taking drugs during that era more a norm rather than an exception in the show-biz?

 

Heroin or no heroin, once they loosened up their trousers, the band's days were numbered.

 

Are you insinuating that members of The Rolling Stones were on drugs in the late '60s? Citation please. /s

 

Yes, I make this statement. It's they who have to prove if it's not true...

 

John was even on an LP cover without any trousers at all...

 

See! If that's not supporting proof, then I don't know what else is...

 

It's all about the trousers

 

15 reasons, in no particular order:

1. Allen Klein
2. Yoko
3. Heroin use by John
4. Stealing of George's digestive biscuits
5. Paul getting too bossy and spending what seemed like 3 months on recording "Maxwell's Silver Hammer"
6. George wanted to join The Band
7. Ringo didn't feel love
8. Paul was dead
9. Business chaos at Apple
10. Losing song publishings to Sir Lew Grade
11. Magic Alex put an evil spell on them
12. John was pissed that the band would not record "Cold Turkey"
13. George had more than 50 songs that he wanted to record
14. Did I mention Allen Klein?
15. Did I mention Yoko?

 

I agree - the 'shades' comment refers to 1966 - the extended limo scene outtake in particular - when they were both on junk; Dylan throws up 3/4s through the 'scene'.

 

Yes, this is a really sloppy error for an academic.