![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2020\/11\/LennonJohn.png\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
This is a response to \u201cTop 10 Unpleasant Facts About John Lennon\u201d<\/a> (Edward Benjamin, ListVerse<\/em>, 5-12-12).<\/p>\n Not to overlook any real sin here (and there is clearly sin), but as an avid amateur Beatles historian meself, here are a few thoughts, and (I think) a bit of balance:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n *<\/p>\n 6. Lennon was used by opportunists like Jerry Rubin. He was mostly naive and idealistic to a fault, politically. But he did exhibit some true insight on many things. For example, I posted a video where John and Yoko decried the notion of overpopulation and said that it was a myth. How many big stars would have done that<\/em>?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n 5. Asinine and petty (\u201cremarkably under-talented\u201d?). One has to be pretty ignorant of pop and rock music (and music, generally) to make such a ridiculous claim. Most biographers and fellow musicians attribute the singular greatness of the Beatles to the symbiotic, complementary and competitive musical relationship of Paul and John: both musical geniuses in very different ways. Take either away and there would have been no Beatles as we know the group: not even close.<\/p>\n *<\/p>\n The reason why John was less active in later Beatles efforts was heroin and other drugs. So he can be blamed for that, but this has no relation to his abilities as a songwriter (having only to do with how drugs adversely affected it; even that is not always the case by a long shot, as Brian Wilson\u2019s example abundantly indicates). It\u2019s not like the other Beatles never did drugs (though I don\u2019t think the others did heroin). Ringo became an alcoholic; all took acid, etc. Rubber Soul<\/em> was a pothead album and Revolver<\/em> and Sgt. Pepper<\/em> were LSD albums.<\/p>\n The Beatles was very much a collective effort (including George Martin\u2019s fabulous production). I think its particularly absurd for anyone who loves Beatles music (my favorite all-time group since 1964), to act as if John Lennon didn\u2019t play a key role in that, and to try to make out that he had no talent. That just ain\u2019t reality there . . .<\/p>\n<\/div>\n This is a response to \u201cTop 10 Unpleasant Facts About John Lennon\u201d (Edward Benjamin, ListVerse, 5-12-12). Not to overlook any real sin here (and there is clearly sin), but as an avid amateur Beatles historian meself, here are a few thoughts, and (I think) a bit of balance: 10. First wife Cynthia (I read her […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":52583,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[44],"tags":[1404,5018,6957],"class_list":["post-52580","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-personal-page","tag-beatles","tag-john-lennon","tag-rock-music"],"yoast_head":"\n\n\n\n10. First wife Cynthia (I read her book) said that Lennon struck her once in anger, promised to never do it again, and was true to his word. Whether that means he is a \u201cwife-beater\u201d I don\u2019t know, but it sounds like real repentance. I never heard that he struck Yoko before, so can\u2019t comment on that. Ringo has admitted to serious wife-beating back in his drunken days.<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n9. True; at least he seemed to have done much better with his second son, so this shows some significant growth in parental responsibility. I\u2019ve heard that the relationship with Julian was improving quite a bit at the time of his murder, and there is reason to think that the positive trajectory would have likely continued. Moreover, I don\u2019t think anyone can comprehend the pressure put on him by Beatlemania in 1964-1966, while Julian was an infant. It\u2019s pretty tough to be a good father while touring feverishly around the world. His own family background was brutal: abandoned by his father: given to his aunt by his mother (whom he barely knew till he was 15; then she was killed by being hit by a car shortly afterwards), the early death of his uncle who was a father-figure. This doesn\u2019t excuse anything he did wrong, but it is a good predictor that someone won\u2019t be a perfect father, with that sort of background with his own father.<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n8. Some of these seem to be stretching it quite a bit in the rush to put him in the worst possible light. And there are more interesting things that could have been mentioned: such as his claiming to be Jesus to the other Beatles in 1969.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n*<\/div>\n7. Half-true, and I agree that he was much more<\/em>\u00a0responsible than the other three, but most Beatles historians place the cause in the death of manager Brian Epstein in 1967 and the resulting business hassles that took the fun out of it. George and Ringo both left temporarily before John announced his eventual impending departure. George was highly resentful of John and Paul for hogging most of the songs and not including him in their songwriting efforts, and at Paul for trying to dominate recording sessions. I think it\u2019s as naive to primarily<\/em>\u00a0blame one person for a break-up of a band, as it is to believe that only one person broke up a marriage (in many cases). Takes two. Takes four.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n4. This is almost as silly as #5. All musicians have serious musical influences. Why should John Lennon have been different? And why in the world would this be on a list of \u201cunpleasant\u201d facts?<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n3. This is largely true of both the rock and artistic cultures and even avant-garde bohemianism (where everyone conforms to the nonconformist fads of the moment), and also (I would say) of our culture at large. Again, why single out Lennon for this? It flows from personal insecurity and desire to be liked and part of the crowd: hardly unique to John Lennon to such an extent that it should be used to trash him.<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n2. Really? As if this is not true of virtually all big-time musicians, or those who are ambitious in any field? So once again it is silly to single him out for a general failing or characteristic of those in his class. The list is becoming quite absurd and over-the-top by now . . .<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n*<\/div>\n1. True in some indisputable ways, but it\u2019s also a general failing of 60s pop music icons and the counter-culture movement in general: so much so that Neil Young in his 1990 song, \u201cThe Days That Used to Be\u201d commented on the massive hypocrisy.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n*<\/div>\nI think the most curious thing about the article is that it leaves out perhaps the most indefensible Lennon behavior of all: his adultery (leaving his wife Cynthia) and extensive womanizing before and during both his marriages.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n*<\/div>\nThus, the article doesn\u2019t seem to be written from a Christian perspective, as to what is right and wrong, and relative degrees of sin. Typically of the secular mentality, sexual promiscuity and divorce are fine and dandy: not even worth a mention in a catalogue of real and alleged \u201cunpleasant facts\u201d about a celebrity.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n***<\/div>\n*<\/div>\nAdditional comments in the original Facebook thread:<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n\n\nReplying to someone on another page, who wrote: \u201cJohn had little to do with the Beatles\u2019 last couple of albums, when they were blazing new trails musically.\u201d<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\nThat holds true mainly for Let it Be<\/em> and Abbey Road<\/em> (in the latter, George had the two best songs and surpassed even Paul, in my opinion), because of drugs and increasing apathy, but not for Sgt. Pepper<\/em> (arguably their masterpiece), where John fully participated, with enthusiasm, and Magical Mystery Tour<\/em> (with his magnificent I Am the Walrus<\/em>\u00a0and Strawberry Fields<\/em>\u00a0and All You Need is Love<\/em>), and The White Album<\/em>. In the latter, I would say his songs were every bit the match of Paul\u2019s. But it was like a collection of four solo albums.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n***<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n\n\n\u201cThe word genius should not be used when discussing a pop star. Reserve that for Mozart and all the great classical musicians.\u201d<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\nThat\u2019s not what many many serious musicologists think. The songwriting genius of The Beatles has often been compared to Franz Schubert<\/a>. Why can\u2019t it be \u201cboth\/and\u201d? Why must we get legalistic? Personally, I am a huge classical fan (played classical piano as a child, and later, trombone in an orchestra) and rock music fan.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n***<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n\n\n\u201cHow does one reconcile the undeniable occult trappings which are pervasive in the messages of the Beatles?\u201d<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\nI think it\u2019s nonsense. Only George was particularly religious, and he was a Hindu. This strikes me as along the lines of the ridiculous \u201cPaul is dead\u201d supposed \u201cclues\u201d in their music . . .<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n***<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n\n\n\u201cIn his song Imagine<\/em> he states \u201cImagine there\u2019s no heaven\u201d; What a terrible thing to say.\u201d<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\nI totally agree. I\u2019ve often thought when I hear that song, that this is perhaps one of the most terrifying things imaginable to enter one\u2019s mind. Yet here he is thinking that \u201cno heaven\u201d is some pleasant and desirable thought. I think it\u2019s a variation on the old \u201cpie in the sky\u201d canard: that if we desire and long for heaven, somehow we are useless on the earth. That may be true for a few fanatics, but it\u2019s mostly a Big Lie used to knock down Christianity.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n***<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n\nImagine there\u2019s no Beatles<\/div>\nIt\u2019s very hard to do<\/div>\nOnly rap and hip hop<\/div>\nAnd twerking Miley Cyrus too<\/div>\nImagine all the young people<\/div>\nList\u2019ning to a melody (!) . . .<\/div>\nYou may say I\u2019m old-fashioned<\/div>\nBut I\u2019m not the only one . . .<\/div>\n<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n***<\/div>\n*<\/div>\nHe sat on his butt and did no music for five years (1975-1980), but that is almost the norm today. I\u2019ve been waiting four years for new U2 . . . The Beatles used to do two albums a year. Those were the days. At that rate of music-making, there would have been 6-8 new U2 albums since their last, and some 66 albums since they began!!! This is part of The Beatles\u2019 genius: the fact that they put out so<\/em> much music (and great music) in their short lifespan of 1962-1969, and it still is among the best of any rock or pop music ever.<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n***<\/div>\n*<\/div>\nRelated Reading:<\/span><\/strong><\/div>\n*<\/div>\nReview of US Version Beatles Albums: 1964<\/a>\u00a0(lots of interesting comparisons of US and UK tracks) [12-1-04]\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n*<\/div>\nAmazon Review of the 2009 Beatles Stereo and Mono Box Sets<\/a>\u00a0[9-13-09]<\/span><\/div>\n*<\/div>\n\u00a0Beatles, Motown, Beach Boys, Etc.: Classic Rock Discographies, Commentary, and Mono vs. Stereo Analysis<\/em><\/a>\u00a0[my only secular book: 5-12-12]<\/span><\/div>\n*<\/div>\n\u201cBeatles Heaven\u201d Again (New \u201c1\u201d Album)<\/a>\u00a0(see<\/span>\u00a0Amazon review<\/a>)\u00a0[11-9-15]<\/span><\/div>\n*<\/div>\nAmazon Review of\u00a0Sgt. Pepper<\/em>\u00a0(50th Anniversary Edition)<\/a>\u00a0(See also<\/span>\u00a0my own posting at Patheos<\/a>)\u00a0[5-26-17]<\/span><\/div>\n*<\/div>\nReview of\u00a0The White Album<\/em>\u00a0(Beatles): 50th Anniversary Remix<\/a>\u00a0(see the<\/span>\u00a0review on Amazon<\/a>)\u00a0[11-14-18]<\/span><\/div>\n*<\/div>\n***<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n(originally posted on 12-28-13 on Facebook)<\/div>\n*<\/div>\nPhoto credit:\u00a0<\/strong><\/span>DECARPENTRIE\u00a0<\/a>(12-12-19)<\/span> [Pixabay<\/a> \/ Pixabay license<\/a>]<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n***<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"