I would hope that with making comments like these you would have at some point read Ray Coleman's "Lennon." But judging from what you say, it would sound like you have. All I can say is that people make mistakes. People make bad decisions, people treat other people cruelly and without care. Those are just some of the ugly traits that make us all human. I think that John realized the mistakes that he had made in life and was seeking to rectify them as he got older. He was determined to be there for Sean because he hadn't been there for Julian. He knew that and understood what a horrible mistake he had made. He learned from his history, however, and was determined not to repeat it. Certainly that doesn't excuse him from what happened, but you can't change the past. You can only change the behavior and not repeat the same mistakes over and over again.
As far as the comment about better to burn out than fade away, I'd have to agree. But John certainly didn't burn out. It wasn't like he overdosed (see Hendrix, Morrison, Joplin) or offed himself (Cobain). But I understand what you mean in terms of what he would be like today. I'm afraid that he would be pretty irrelevant today. I mean, does it matter what Paul and Ringo do? Does it matter what their contemporaries like the Stones and what's left of the Who do? No. He'd be in a state of semi-retirment, would probably record every now and again. I, of course, would have loved to hear what he would come up with, but at the same time I'm afraid I wouldn't have liked it. The reason that I say that is because if you really listen to Double Fantasy and Milk and Honey, his styles and tones had really changed. A lot of the songs sound a bit too bouncy and not really similar to what he had already done. Now I'm not saying that he should have stuck to the same old formula and tried to be doing endless sequels/remakes/retreads of old hits, but I think that he had gotten a bit too contemporary. What might he have done during the era of the hair bands, during the era of grunge, during the current era where rock music is basically an artifact of a bygone era? I would have been very interested to know, and I would be afraid it wouldn't live up to my expectations. That's why I've always been able to enjoy John and George's solo work as opposed to Paul's. I've just always felt there was nothing much to Paul's best solo work when compared to John's best or to George's All Things Must Pass album (the reason I highlight that album is because George never quite topped that). The thing that John's death did above all else was to basically canonize him for all times. For the people who were there, he'll always be the pinnacle of a very memorable era in both music and the world as a whole. For those of us, like me, who weren't, he's a sort of mythic figure, someone who represents that era we can never understand because we weren't there. For me, he's always made me wonder why there is nobody around today who compares to him on that level. John Lennon was truly one-of-a-kind.
reply
share
MJK1
18 years ago
All I can say is that people make mistakes. People make bad decisions, people treat other people cruelly and without care. Those are just some of the ugly traits that make us all human. I think that John realized the mistakes that he had made in life and was seeking to rectify them as he got older. He was determined to be there for Sean because he hadn't been there for Julian. He knew that and understood what a horrible mistake he had made. He learned from his history, however, and was determined not to repeat it.
I wouldn't argue with one single word of this; nor with most of what followed relating to what place John Lennon might have carved out for himself were he still alive today.
I wasn't highlighting John Lennon's less salubrious moments in life just for the sake of making negative comments about somebody whose place in musical history is guaranteed in a positive way. I was simply trying to restore a balance to some of the earlier arguments; statements which practically deified a human being who had, rather like so many of us, a flawed character. Lennon's "problem" was (like almost every other celebrity) that his personal life, including all his foibles and pecadilloes, was open to public scrutiny and did not stand up well to it.
But he was a musician and an outstanding and innovative one. For that, his place in history is, as I've already said, guaranteed. There is no need to place him on other pedestals to which he has no right; and, indeed, to which he never actually made claim.
Do not stand at my grave and cry;
I am not there. I did not die.
reply
share
dalefl
18 years ago
For someone who was not there you seem to have it figured out. Highly commendable, from someone who was there from the beginning. Thus we witness the intangible power, or "it", that The Beatles above all other artists have on the enlightened. Not everyone 'gets' it and some never will. But therein lies the unexplainable attraction and grip they have over us that can't be quantified.
reply
share