i feel like out of everyone in john’s life that hes been romantically involved w even if its speculation (yoko, cyn, brian, stu, groupies) he’d always pick paul and thats what makes mclennon mclennon
i mean he did also pick someone over paul. that was a pretty significant thing that happened. like i understand where you’re coming from here but he very much did choose someone over paul.
I’ve only listened one time to Paul’s new single, “Get Enough,” which he released on midnight of New Year’s 2019, and I already know for sure that it is a song for John. Paul sings about walking on the docks with his love, knowing that he’ll need that person forever, being young together, full of hope, dreaming of the future. Remembering that person’s face. He’ll never get enough of that person. Does the other person remember, as Paul does? It’s about their “early days” (as Paul calls it in another truly great song for John) in Liverpool, and their rise to the toppermost of the poppermost. It’s full of longing and love. Even though the refrain goes “I can’t get enough, girl,” I know that Paul and John both used “girl” and “woman” and “she” and “her” when they wrote and sang songs to and for each other, often. I know that on the other side, John is listening to it and loves it.
Any Day Now, Bob Dylan's songs sung by Joan Baez, 1969. Cover design and illustrations by Joan Baez. x
there’s a lot of bullshit lennon/mccartney quotes out there, misattributed by biases in biographers or straight-up fabrications. but there’s also “if i was a girl”. there’s also “if he had been a woman”. there’s also “is this a self-portrait?” there’s “in bed.” there’s “maybe that would’ve satisfied it”. there’s “nothing to worry about”, and “life begins at 40”, and “it’s only me.” there’s “the emperor of eternity”. “he chose me.” “i’m still in love with you”. there’s “i can always deny that it was ever written about him.” so who cares
So I made a post about this a few days ago but I didn't include the clip:
For context, right before this Paul is talking about his interest in Magritte and the inspiration behind the Apple logo and the Robert he refers to is Robert Fraser. Right after he says "i'm quite secure about my sexuality" he mumbles "yeah, don't know about that" as the audience laughs. And yes, like, to be charitable he could just be referencing the fact his friends still found it "weird" to go on a trip to Paris with a gay man but it's the first time I've heard Paul making reference to his sexuality that's not just him claiming he's straight, 'ungay', what have you (he also immediately brings up the s&m joke he had made earlier to brush past what he said). And I think it would be fair to say one interpretation is paul acknowledging that he wasn't exactly as "secure" about his sexuality as either he thought at the time or is now
John Lennon in Stuart Sutcliffe’s studio, 45a Eimsbütteler Strasse, Altona, Hamburg, photographed by Astrid Kirchherr. (May, 1962)
-
Why can’t we go for other people to heaven? John asks me that—he said he would go for Stuart to heaven because Stuart was such a marvelous boy and he is nothing.
— Astrid Kirchherr, letter to Millie Sutcliffe. (May 30th, 1962)
im sorry but i just can't stop thinking about it. this is insane. im feeling so many things. i need to draw this. i need this to be a scene in a biopic if there ever is one.
Hello!
I'm looking for a section of the lunchroom tape (from the Get Back sessions) where John says something to Paul along the lines of "I mean, you've only recently realised what you were doing to me". Does that ring any bells?
You seem to know your way around amoralto's archives, and I'm not having any luck searching there :)
Thanks!
Hi, @i-am-the-oyster (love the name, by the way)!
I think you might be referring to this section of the Lunchroom Tape:
JOHN: And it’s just that, you know. It’s only this year that you’ve suddenly realised, like who I am, or who he is, or anything like that.
I find this bit of the conversation particularly impenetrable; and all the more fascinating because of it. It's here that we have this famed exchange (whose full meaning still eludes me):
JOHN: Because you – ’cause you’ve suddenly got it all, you see. PAUL: Mm. JOHN: I know that, because of the way I am, like when we were in Mendips, like I said, “Do you like me?” or whatever it is. I’ve always – uh, played that one. PAUL: [laughs nervously] Yes. JOHN: So. PAUL: Uh, I’d been watching, I’d been watching. I’d been watching the picture. YOKO: Go back to George. What are we going to do about George?
I encourage folks to go listen to the full audio and transcript and try their hand at decoding it!
I don't know if it's accessible on the mobile app, but @amoralto has a separate page with links to all the Get Back excerpts, listed in chronological order. It's a pretty neat resource if you want to just binge through interesting little snippets from these sessions (some that made it onto the documentary, and many that didn't).
To those curious about the Lunchroom Tape in particular, here's a (play)list of all the transcribed excerpts, with @amoralto's descriptions for context:
Over lunch, the remaining Beatles touch on George’s resignation from the band on the 10th, as well as a group meeting held the previous day which ended in less than desirable circumstances (with George leaving the room, frustrated by John’s persistently Yoko-filtered standard of communication). While Yoko contends that it would be easy for John (and Paul) to regain George’s favour, John points out that this is a more deeply-rooted issue than it may seem, compounded over the years by John and Paul’s treatment of George and his defaulted status within the group. Upon this problem of overriding egos, however, Paul suggests (passive-aggressively) that it isn’t just the Lennon-and-McCartney tandem that is causing George upset and consternation.
As the problem of George’s current resignation from the band is discussed, John makes it about him and Paul wonders what it’s all worth.
John contends with how the force of his partnership with Paul and his relationship with Yoko has negatively affected George and perhaps directly contributed to George’s walkout on the group three days prior.
During a discussion on how the rest of the group should move forward after George’s departure on the 10th, John wonders if they should get George back at all, suggesting his role as a Beatle is replaceable (unlike his own or Paul’s), and likens this unkindly to how Ringo first replaced Pete Best. Paul notes that John has been the top buck in getting himself heard (and getting his way) since the inception of the group (which John protests) and quickly reassures Ringo when he wryly declares himself to be little more than rabbit food for the group. Paul admits that both he and John have done one over on George, albeit unconsciously as an effect of the competition and unaware of how it may have hurt George in the process, but John argues that he’s known since early childhood how manipulative he himself can be, and has tried to curb it to little avail.
In the middle of a personal discussion with John and Ringo about the band, its tenuous future, and their relationships with one another, Paul (in response to John’s admission of insecurity in the face of external pressures from the public and media to perform) is emphatic about his faith in them and their abilities and contends that whatever interpersonal problems they have can be resolved, for what their music is worth.
While Yoko and Paul conduct their own conversation with each other, Linda talks to John about the inevitable difficulties any relationship faces - even in the context of a musical partnership - and why it doesn’t prove the relationship itself is an expired one. John (inexplicably or not) laments that the White Album doesn’t sound like the genuine, inspired band collaboration they achieved in the past.
As Paul encourages an unconfident Ringo to go ahead with his plans to record a solo LP, John hedgingly brings up his own apprehensions about following his instincts (especially when he’s not even sure what he really wants to do). In their inimitable and emotionally non-committal fashion, John and Paul engage in metaphors about intentions, conveying these intentions in actions, and how these actions may be conveyed by those who see it. (Basically: what John and Paul talk about when they talk about love.)
John and Paul have an obfuscating conversation about their songwriting partnership and creative process, which has been incapacitated by a lack of direction, misplaced (misread) intentions, and the unmet (unrealised) expectations they’ve inflicted upon each other. (In other words: issues. And some projecting of issues onto George, for good measure.)
In the midst of a personal discussion about working together within the band, John tries to explain the disconnect in their process, and why he can’t envision their songs the way Paul can. As both John and Paul circle around the issues of honest communication and (living up to) each other’s expectations, they eventually project onto George bring George into the quandary of the Lennon-McCartney partnership.
in that mintz book does it mention the lost weekend story about off-his-head john yelling "this is all Roman Polanski's fault!!" while stabbing a mattress? Possibly from the same night as the chair tying. Ever since I read about that in May's book it's been my personal what happened in India - what do you MEAN, John????? Did he even know Polanski?
SCREAM no it does not but that beyond tracks 😭 it does however mention that he used to go to casinos and place chips on like almost every single number of the roulette wheel and he'd lose money bc it took more chips to do this than he'd make back when he inevitably won. and when mintz tried to explain this he just got confused bc "but I win every time". also they went to mcdonalds together once. and john thought he solved jfk's assassination (the driver turned around and did it, which. literal video of this not being true)
Oh my god it's John
i mainly use twitter but their beatles fandom is nothing compared to this so here i am
111 posts